APRIL 2010

$4.45

“Instaurare omnia in Christo”

A JOURNAL OF ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION

INSIDE

ST. ISAAC JOGUES CONCLUSION

BISHOP FELLAY: The Doctrinal Discussions

Validity of Ordinations CONCLUSION

Fr. Joseph Spillmann’s

Tales of Foreign Lands

Catholic Stories of Adventure in the Mission Lands

Volume
now 2
availabl
e

Fr. Joseph Spillmann was born in 1842 at Zug, Switzerland. He joined the Jesuits and in 1874 was ordained to the
priesthood. His Tales of Foreign Lands series contains 21 booklets, consisting of edifying and tastefully illustrated
stories for the young. They have been translated into many languages. Newly reprinted by Angelus Press.

The Shipwreck.The world of the Irish lad Willy Brown is turned
upside-down when his sinister uncle appears on the doorstep to take his
schoolmate Joseph, a Chinese orphan, away with him aboard the good
ship “St. George.” The two boys find themselves together on the high
sea when the captain plots a perilous scheme to stage a shipwreck. But
things gets out of control when a mighty hurricane steers the ship off the
coast of the Solomon Islands, driving them to crash upon the reefs of a
cannibal-infested island.
Crosses and Crowns.The story opens with a scene from the pages of
history: “The Emperor Tue-Dueck, a terrible persecutor of Christians,
lay dying.” The young Christian page, Thuan, is at the Emperor’s
bedside and tells him how he may yet defeat the dragon tormenting him
and obtain eternal life, holding out to him a crucifix. The emperor’s
rage at the sight of the cross earns the boy a flogging, and soon a new
persecution is unleashed. The Christian spirit shines through in all his
actions in this mission land where bloody persecution is still a threat to
those who hold the faith of Christ.
Prince Arumugam. Having been cured by Father Francis after the
native doctors and snake-charmers failed, Arumugam asks of his father,
the rajah, to let him go to the missioner’s school. The rajah consents, on
condition that the priest not try to convert his son. The priest agrees, and
the child Arumugam enters the school. But the progress of Arumugam
towards Christianity, and his courage to profess his beliefs in the face
of his father’s tenacious opposition, is challenged by the rajah's plans to
uproot his son’s new-found faith by all means fair and foul…

332pp. Color Softcover.
STK# 8455✱ $14.95

The Pirate’s Prisoner. For hundreds of years, Moorish slave owners
furrowed the waters of the Mediterranean in search of human prey for
the slave markets of Northern Africa. Little Francesco goes down to the
water’s edge alone to await his father’s return from the sea. Instead of
meeting his father, lurking pirates carry him off to their ship. The pirate
Achmed hopes to induce the boy to become a Muslim and his successor,
while the boy’s father tries desperately to ransom his beloved son.

VOLUME 1:

Love Your Enemies. The Maoris of New Zealand have had enough of being cheated by the English
and rebel. Meanwhile, the Patrick O’Neal family, trying to start a new life there, are overtaken by a
marauding tribe and must flee for their lives, all the while trying to practice in earnest that hardest
of Christian maxims: “Love Your Enemies.”

Maron. It is Lebanon in 1860, and the Druses are persecuting the Christians under the complicit

eye of the Turkish government. The Mufti of Sidon incites the mob to kill the Christian dogs even as
his son Ali, sickened by the slaughter, helps his Christian friend Maron flee to the hills, and learns
from his actions the reality of grace and the gifts of the Holy Ghost.

The Festival of Corpus Christi. Don Pedro and his nephew have accepted their government’s

commission to shut down the Jesuit missions in Bolivia. Reaching the mission, they discover a village
where the Indians are living a civilized, Christian life. Their preparations for the annual Corpus
Christi procession and the taming of a savage tribe form the backdrop of this tale.

320pp. Color Softcover.
STK# 8409✱ $14.95

The Cabin Boys. It is 1798, the ninth year of the bloody French Revolution, and fifteen-year-old

Paul and twelve-year-old Albert embark as cabin boys on a sea voyage with unusual cargo in the
hold: 200 priests, condemned to forced labor in Cayenne. Gripping adventures await the boys, aided
by wise priests at sea and on land, until the tale brings them back home again.

The

“Instaurare omnia in Christo — To restore all things in Christ.”

ngelus
Volume XXXIII, Number 4

APRIL 2010

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

Fr. Arnaud Rostand
EDITOR

Fr. Markus Heggenberger
ASSISTANT EDITOR

Mr. James Vogel

OPERATIONS MANAGER

Mr. Michael Sestak

Contents
Motto of Pope St. Pius X

2 LETTER FROM THE EDITOR
Fr. Markus Heggenberger, FSSPX

3 INTERVIEW WITH BISHOP FELLAY, FSSPX
5 VALIDITY IS NOT ENOUGH CONCLUSION

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Miss Anne Stinnett

DESIGN AND LAYOUT

Mr. Simon Townshend

COMPTROLLER

Mr. Robert Wiemann, CPA

Fr. Scott Gardner, FSSPX

8 THE ULTIMATE ROMANCE CONCLUSION
Edwin Faust

13 CATHOLIC TRADITION IN BELARUS
Maxim Karaliou

CUSTOMER SERVICE

Mr. John Rydholm
Miss Rebecca Heatwole
Miss Anne Craig

SHIPPING AND HANDLING

Mr. Jon Rydholm

“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

19

THE ANGELUS ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTICLE REPRINT

Some Initial Reflections on the
Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Cœtibus

27 TELEVISION: THE SOUL AT RISK PART 5
Isabelle Doré

32 THE AUTHORITY OF VATICAN II QUESTIONED PART 4
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

34 CHURCH AND WORLD
Bishop Christian Nourrichard,
the modernist bishop of Evreux,
France, dismissed Fr. Francis
Michel as pastor of the church
of Saint-Taurin (Thiberville).
Fr. Michel runs his parish in a
traditional style, which seems to
be disliked by the bishop.

SUBSCRIPTION RATES
US

Foreign Countries
(inc. Canada & Mexico)

1 year 2 years 3 years
$35.00 $65.00 $100.00
$55.00 $105.00 $160.00

All payments must be in US funds only.

ONLINE SUBSCRIPTIONS

Faithful from Belarus
join an SSPX pilgrimage.

40 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Fr. Peter Scott, FSSPX

$15.00/year (the online edition is available
around the 10th of the preceding month). To subscribe
visit: www.angelusonline.org.
Register for free to access back issues 14 months
and older plus many other site features.
The Angelus (ISSN 10735003) is published monthly
under the patronage of St. Pius X and Mary, Queen
of Angels. Publication office is located at 2915
Forest Ave., Kansas City, MO 64109. PH (816) 7533150; FAX (816) 753-3557.
Periodicals Postage Rates paid at Kansas City, MO.
©2010 by Angelus Press. Manuscripts will be used
at the discretion of the editors. Postmaster sends
address changes to the address above.

ON OUR COVER: Detail of a mosaic in the Cathedral Basilica of St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.

2

Letter
from
the
Editor

The Catholic Church has been since the first
centuries a church of martyrs. The first examples we
have from the Bible: St. Stephen (Acts 6:8 ff.) and St.
James (Acts 12:2). The first “Church History,” written
by Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea (263-339), is mostly
an account of Christians who gave their lives for Christ
because they refused to participate in pagan sacrifices.
One of the best known among many other examples
is the martyrdom of Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna:
But when at length he had brought his prayer to an end,
after remembering all that had ever come into contact with
him, small and great, famous and obscure, and the whole
catholic Church throughout the world, the hour of departure being come.…And he was met by Herod, the captain
of police, and by his father Nicetes, who took him into their
carriage, and sitting beside him endeavored to persuade
him, saying, “For what harm is there in saying, Lord Caesar, and sacrificing and saving your life?” He at first did not
answer; but when they persisted, he said, “I am not going
to do what you advise me.”
And when they failed to persuade him, they uttered
dreadful words, and thrust him down with violence, so that
as he descended from the carriage he lacerated his shin. But
without turning round, he went on his way promptly and
rapidly, as if nothing had happened to him, and was taken
to the stadium.
But there was such a tumult in the stadium that not many
heard a voice from heaven, which came to Polycarp as he
was entering the place: “Be strong, Polycarp, and play the
man.” And no one saw the speaker, but many of our people
heard the voice.
And when he was led forward, there was a great tumult,
as they heard that Polycarp was taken….
But Polycarp, looking with dignified countenance upon
the whole crowd that was gathered in the stadium, waved
his hand to them, and groaned, and raising his eyes toward
heaven, said, “Away with the Atheists.”
But when the magistrate pressed him, and said, “Swear,
and I will release thee; revile Christ,” Polycarp said, “Fourscore and six years have I been serving him, and he hath
done me no wrong; how then can I blaspheme my king
who saved me?”
But when he again persisted, and said, “Swear by the
genius of Caesar,” Polycarp replied, “If thou vainly supposest that I will swear by the genius of Caesar, as thou
sayest, feigning to be ignorant who I am, hear plainly: I
am a Christian. But if thou desirest to learn the doctrine of
Christianity, assign a day and hear.”…
But the proconsul said, “I have wild beasts; I will throw
thee to them unless thou repent.” But he said, “Call them;
for repentance from better to worse is a change we cannot
make. But it is a noble thing to turn from wickedness to
righteousness.”
But he again said to him, “If thou despisest the wild
beasts, I will cause thee to be consumed by fire, unless thou
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

repent.” But Polycarp said, “Thou threatenest a fire which
burneth for an hour, and after a little is quenched; for thou
knowest not the fire of the future judgment and of the eternal punishment which is reserved for the impious. But why
dost thou delay? Do what thou wilt.”
Saying these and other words besides, he was filled with
courage and joy, and his face was suffused with grace, so
that not only was he not terrified and dismayed by the
words that were spoken to him, but, on the contrary, the
proconsul was amazed, and sent his herald to proclaim
three times in the midst of the stadium: “Polycarp hath
confessed that he is a Christian.”
And when this was proclaimed by the herald, the whole
multitude, both of Gentiles and of Jews, who dwelt in Smyrna, cried out with ungovernable wrath and with a great
shout, “This is the teacher of Asia, the father of the Christians, the overthrower of our gods, who teacheth many not
to sacrifice nor to worship.”…
Forthwith then the materials prepared for the pile were
placed about him; and as they were also about to nail him
to the stake, he said, “Leave me thus; for he who hath given
me strength to endure the fire, will also grant me strength
to remain in the fire unmoved without being secured by
you with nails.” So they did not nail him, but bound him.
And he, with his hands behind him, and bound like a
noble ram taken from a great flock, an acceptable burnt-offering unto God omnipotent, said, “Father of Thy beloved
and blessed Son Jesus Christ, through whom we have
received the knowledge of Thee, the God of angels and of
powers and of the whole creation and of the entire race of
the righteous who live in Thy presence, I bless Thee that
Thou hast deemed me worthy of this day and hour, that I
might receive a portion in the number of the martyrs, in the
cup of Christ, unto resurrection of eternal life, both of soul
and of body, in the immortality of the Holy Spirit.”…
When he had offered up his Amen and had finished his
prayer, the firemen lighted the fire…
So at length the lawless men, when they saw that the
body could not be consumed by the fire, commanded an
executioner to approach and pierce him with the sword.
And when he had done this there came forth a quantity
of blood so that it extinguished the fire; and the whole
crowd marveled that there should be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom this man also
was one, the most wonderful teacher in our times, apostolic
and prophetic, who was bishop of the catholic Church in
Smyrna. For every word which came from his mouth was
accomplished and will be accomplished.

According to Cardinal John Henry Newman (in
Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine) there is
an essential similarity between the Catholic Church of
the first centuries and the Church of the latter times.
Therefore it seems to be a wrong concept of the Catholic
Church to make oneself comfortable in this world and
to build an earthly paradise without being mindful of
the higher reality: the eternal life for which the human
soul has been created.
A Catholic Church which is mindful of the past of
the martyrs could easily avoid most of the contemporary
problems which seem, in this perspective, a homemade
problem out of selfishness.
Instaurare Omnia in Christo,
Fr. Markus Heggenberger

The Doctrinal Discussions

3

Interview with Bishop Fellay

What is the difference between these doctrinal discussions and
the preceding doctrinal exchanges that took placed during the
lifetime of Archbishop Lefebvre, for example concerning the
Dubia.

Previously, the exchanges were rather informal, except
for a few rare occasions, like at the beginning of John Paul II’s
pontificate. Archbishop Lefebvre, while presenting the main
objections to the novelties–and protesting vigorously against
the scandals shaking the Church–was then looking for a more
practical agreement: he thought that Rome would let him
conduct “the experiment of Tradition” by granting the Society
of St. Pius X a canonical regularization before any substantive
debate. After 1988, he clearly indicated the course to be
followed: put the discussion on doctrinal grounds, on the very
essence of the crisis ravaging the Church. Today, the Holy See
has officially granted us these doctrinal discussions without
demanding anything in return. This is for us the opportunity
to witness to the Faith and to make ourselves the echo of
2,000 years of Tradition. Nor does this prevent us from
bringing up certain studies, such as the Dubia on religious
freedom, which did not obtain a satisfactory response at the
time.

that they be brought up during these
conversations which, I remind you, revolve
around the Council and its “aggiornamento.”

Is it possible to keep these discussions
secret? Haven’t some things been leaked?

Not to my knowledge, except for some
secondary aspects concerning the general
organization of the conversations.

Why do the Vatican and the Society intend to
keep the doctrinal conversations so private?

It is very important that the atmosphere
of the discussions be peaceful and serene.
We live in a highly mediatized age of
universal democracy in which everyone
judges everything and gives his opinion on
everything. The theological questions and
the stakes are such that it is preferable to
let things take place in private. When and

Only the Society has obtained serious, almost solemn,
discussions. No Ecclesia Dei community has been granted
as much. In your opinion, is this the sign of the rightness
of our attitude of resistance and refusal of compromise or
an ambiguous canonical recognition, or is it the sign that,
ultimately, the Ecclesia Dei communities do not have much that
distinguishes them from the conciliar line?
I dare say it is a sign of both.

Can you give us an exact list of the themes under discussion?

You will find them in the press release [from the Ecclesia
Dei Commission] that came out after the first meeting last
October 26: “In particular, the questions due to be examined
concern the concept of Tradition, the Missal of Paul VI,
the interpretation of Vatican Council II in continuity with
Catholic doctrinal Tradition, the themes of the unity of
the Church and the Catholic principles of ecumenism, the
relationship between Christianity and non-Christian religions,
and religious freedom.”

Will modern philosophy and the new concepts (witness,
dialogue, openness, commitment, experience, etc.) be on the
agenda of the discussions?
All of these subjects underlie many of the problems
related to the new ecclesiology, and it seems inevitable

www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

4
if the moment comes, then it will be time to give an
account publicly.

It is often said that Rome and the Society do not
understand each other because they do not speak
the same language. Is this true of our present Roman
interlocutors? What must be done to have the same
language?

It is still too early to answer you. At any rate,
we are dealing with brilliant minds with whom
we should be able to communicate. A Thomistic
philosophical formation is obviously the best way to
go.

In your opinion, are the theologians chosen by Rome
representative of the general theological current in the
Church today? Or are they rather closer to a particular
tendency? Is their line of thought close to Benedict
XVI’s?
Our interlocutors appear to me to be very
faithful to the Pope’s positions. They belong to
what one can call the conservative line, that of the
partisans of the most traditional reading possible of
the Council. They desire the good of the Church
but at the same time they want to save the Council:
therein lies the squaring of the circle.

Are the theologians chosen by the Vatican Thomists?
Are they of the traditional variety?

We shall see. At any rate, we are dealing with a
Dominican, who is, of course, a fine connoisseur of
St. Thomas, but also a Jesuit and a member of Opus
Dei.

In the conversations, what will be the principal
points of reference besides Revelation, Scripture and
Tradition? The magisterium prior to Vatican II alone, or
that after?
The problem concerns Vatican II. Therefore it
is in light of the preceding Tradition that we shall
examine whether the post-conciliar magisterium is a
break or not.

Some fear that our theologians, taken in by the
atmosphere of the Vatican offices, will lower their
guard in their conversations. Can you reassure them?

We are going to Rome to bear witness to the
Faith, and the atmosphere in the offices matters very
little to us. Our theologians will be meeting every
two or three months in a big room of the Palace of
the Holy Office, not in their offices…

As regards the duration of the discussions, seeing the
difficulty of most of the subjects, each of which could
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

take at least a year or two, can the duration be shorter
than five or ten years?
I certainly hope it will not [take so long]… In
any case, when tackling the question of the Mass,
religious freedom, or ecumenism with someone, it
does not take all that time to convince them!

Are you not afraid that during the course of these
discussions, Rome will finally answer your objections
(concerning religious liberty or the New Mass) by the
argument from authority: Rome has decided thus, or
Rome cannot be mistaken, etc.?

One might fear it, of course, but were that to
happen, it would show that Rome had never really
intended to discuss. But debate over Vatican II is
unavoidable. The recent book by Msgr. Gherardini,
a recognized Roman theologian, proves as much.
Vatican II can be discussed; it must be.

Is it not to be feared that these meetings will issue in
joint declarations in which the parties agree on points
in common, but without resolving the deeper issues,
somewhat like the joint declaration with the Lutherans
on justification?
Any joint declaration is out of the question.

Let us suppose for a moment that as a result of the
discussions one of the theologians on the Roman side
were to come over to the traditional side of a thesis
and decide, for example, that religious freedom is not
in conformity with tradition. What might happen then?
Whatever Providence wishes. We shall see then
what should be done. We are not there yet.

The faithful prayed the Rosary for the recognition
of the traditional Mass and for the lifting of the
excommunications. Now they are praying for the
consecration of Russia by the Pope. Do you have the
feeling that they are also praying for a good outcome
to the doctrinal discussions?

It is worth praying for this intention, as the
children of the Eucharistic Crusade did during
the month of January. A very great good for the
Church may flow from our witness to the Faith. In
fact, it seems to me that the objects of these Rosary
crusades overlap: there will be no Marian triumph
without a restoration of the Church and thus of the
Mass with the teaching of the Faith.

This interview with Bishop Fellay was conducted on January 21, 2010,
with Fideliter, a publication of the Society’s French District; translation
by Angelus Press.

5

CONCLUSION
F r .

S c o t t

G a r d n e r ,

S S P X

Validity Is
Not Enough
The Vocation
and Suitability
of Candidates
for Holy Orders

Having seen almost all of the Church’s major requirements
which must be met before a bishop can lawfully confer Holy
Orders, we must now examine some of the other standards
which have been set. Although these criteria are less
momentous than most of what has gone before, they have been
established for good reasons. We shall consider these reasons
briefly.

Canonical Age
It was noted earlier that one bishop was reputed to have
ordained a 12-year-old boy. Anyone who has ever been around
12-year-old boys (or has been one himself) should realize what
a bad idea this is. Holy Mother Church traditionally forbade
bishops to ordain any man under 24 to the priesthood.1 The
reasoning behind these age restrictions is based on more
than merely ensuring that an ordinand’s studies have been
completed. It is necessary that a priest be fully mature and apt
to exercise his spiritual fatherhood–not to mention the awesome
powers of the priesthood–in a truly manly way. In exceptional
cases, bishops can ordain men who are slightly younger, but,
again, there must be a corresponding level of maturity and
virtue in order to dispense from the Church’s standard.
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

6

Confirmation
Just as a man ought to be fully formed physically
and psychologically before ordination, and just as he
must be solid in virtue, he must also be a real adult
spiritually. The Church thus requires that a man
be confirmed before receiving Holy Orders. The
Sacrament of Confirmation makes one a spiritual
adult and strengthens one for the adult states of life:
priesthood, religious life, or marriage.2

The State of Grace
The state of sanctifying grace is required for
the lawful reception of Holy Orders, as it is for all
of the sacraments of the living. Obviously, there is
no way for anyone to be absolutely certain about
the state of one’s own soul in that regard–much less
about anyone else’s. A moral certainty is all that is
required, but that certainty can scarcely be reached
by an ordaining bishop who has no seminary staff
to rely upon for recommendations. Seminarians
themselves must be open with their directors about
their struggles as well as their progress, and, although
the directors cannot normally use the knowledge
obtained in direction to aid the superiors in external
governance, they can and sometimes must advise
seminarians not to receive orders. This sort of
guidance is not normally possible in the context of
irregular ordinations such as the ones which have
become increasingly common.

Observance of the Right
Sequence of, and Intervals
between, Orders
The Church has insisted for many centuries
that each order conferred upon a man be actually
exercised before he receives the next order, so that
there must be intervals between the various orders
he receives on the way to the priesthood. With
even more reason did the Church insist that a man
receive each of the orders without skipping any.
One sometimes hears of irregular cases where the
“independent bishop” ordains a man to the diaconate
before the priesthood, but the contrary practice seems
much more frequent: Lay men are ordained directly
to the priesthood without any previous orders. The
Church did allow a bishop to dispense from the
intervals between some of the minor orders (as is the
common practice in the Society of St. Pius X), but
the intervals had to be observed between the major
orders. The rationale for this is not so much that the
seminarian will learn how to sing the Epistle or serve
Mass properly as to observe his continuing progress
in virtue and learning as he approaches closer to the
altar.

THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

Retreat, Oath,
and Profession of Faith
The reception of the Sacrament of Orders is such
an important event in any man’s life that it must
be preceded by a proper and immediate spiritual
preparation. Thus, Holy Mother Church requires
an ordinand (or even a man who is about to receive
the clerical tonsure) to go on retreat for a specified
number of days. At the end of the retreats before
receiving each of the major orders, the cleric was
required by St. Pius X to take the Oath Against
Modernism and to make the Profession of Faith of the
Council of Trent and of the First Vatican Council.3
The author has never heard of such a retreat in the
context of the irregular ordinations we are examining.

The “Title of Ordination”
Because the Church must be solicitous for the
material support of the clergy, and because no
priests are to be ordained where there is no need for
them, such support must be ensured before a man
can be ordained lawfully. The assurance of support,
known as the “Title of Ordination,” was required
before a man could be ordained, and if the title was
lost before promotion to the next order, another
was required. Religious clerics held the “Title of
Poverty,” signifying that their order would look
after their needs. Diocesan clerics held the title of a
particular benefice (normally a parish) or of “Service
to the Diocese,” provided that they had made an
oath of stability–that they would not try to transfer
to another diocese. Clerics in a society of common
life, such as the Society of St. Pius X, held the title
of “The Common Table,” meaning that all of their
material needs would be supplied by the society.4 The
mechanics of this assurance of material support are
not as important as the principle: that the clergy, who
dedicate their lives to the service of God, should not
have to pursue a secular career in order to survive.
Not only are the titles ignored, but the principle itself
is mostly ignored in irregular ordinations.5

Technical Prerequisites
We come, finally, to some technical prerequisites
which must normally be in place in order for an
ordination to be lawful: the examination, the “banns”
of ordination, and the testimonial letters6 which
may be necessary. While these are, in themselves,
rather less important than what has gone before,
they still have their place in keeping in touch with
the prudence of the Church and in preventing the
disasters which can follow easily from impulsive
ordinations.
Every candidate for Holy Orders must be
examined comprehensively to establish his sufficient
knowledge of the sacred sciences. Individual

It is only necessary to look around at the veritable avalanche of
disasters following from imprudent ordinations to see the source
of so much evil. That source is not God.
superiors of ordinands may require even more
extensive examinations than those given as a matter
of course to all seminarians. Getting passing grades in
the seminary courses and staying out of trouble have
never been sufficient, in themselves, to qualify one
for ordination. How much less qualified would those
men be who have never studied the sacred sciences
at all!
Just as marriage, which is also a sacrament
influencing the common good, must normally be
announced publicly before it takes place, the “banns”
of ordination must be published in the parish of
origin of each candidate.7 The bishop of an ordinand
may require this announcement on an even wider
basis if he so chooses. The purpose is not only to
inform the faithful but to seek out knowledge of any
hidden impediments or irregularities which may
hinder the proposed ordination.
As in the case of the banns of marriage, this
announcement is part of the “due diligence” which
must be performed in order to avoid sacramental
train wrecks. This is never (or at least rarely) done
in the case of irregular ordinations; indeed, they
are regularly conducted quite secretly or at least
discreetly. Such a procedure is repugnant to the
public nature of the Sacrament of Holy Orders,
which, as has already been said, is not given
primarily for the priest himself but for the good of the
whole Church.

Validity Is Not Enough:
For the Church and for Souls
We come, at long last, to the end of this
exploration of the requirements put in place by Holy
Mother Church in order both to promote and to
safeguard the welfare of souls by the right selection
and formation of future priests. Hopefully, by seeing
how extensive and detailed the Church’s prudential
guidelines are, one can begin to appreciate the
enormous risk–even the enormous presumption–a
bishop or an ordinand takes when setting aside the
traditional discipline. Admittedly, there have been,
and presumably always will be, exceptions to one
or another of the canonical standards, but it is a
hallmark of our time–and a hallmark of blinding
pride–always to consider oneself exceptional!
It is only necessary to look around at the
veritable avalanche of disasters following from
imprudent ordinations to see the source of so much
evil. That source is not God. However kind or
otherwise commendable such a priest or bishop may

7

be, if he has received–or given–holy orders to a man,
or in a way, not willed by God, he is in great danger.
He puts souls in danger. He must, somehow, come to
his senses and seek a way out by petitioning Rome
for laicization. He must further do serious penance.
He must not neglect to repair the harm he may have
done to souls, and he must not stand on his dignity–
the dignity of an order that has been usurped. These
may seem like harsh words, but the reality is harsher,
and God is just as well as merciful!
For the faithful, it is time to wake up to the
danger that such irregular ordinations pose to the
common good of the Church. Validity is not enough!
“Valid” is not the same thing as good or fruitful.
Men who have no vocations, who do not know
how to conduct themselves, much less how to form
others, are circulating all over the place. They might
represent less of a danger to the Church if they were
not priests, for they are priests who have taken the
priesthood to themselves, by themselves. They have,
as likely as not, received this priesthood from bishops
who have behaved likewise. Although they may be
friends or even relatives, do not fall into the trap. In
that way lies anarchy, chaos, and finally madness.
The ultimate answer lies in common sense,
enlightened by Faith: examine the fruits and trust
only those who can show good fruits. These fruits will
be the result of God’s blessing on those who follow
the accumulated prudence of the Church, who is our
mother and teacher.
Rev. Fr. Scott Gardner, ordained for the Society of Saint Pius X in 2003, is currently assigned to St. Mary’s Assumption priory in St. Louis, Missouri, where
he coordinates the work of the St. Raymond of Peñafort Canonical Commission. He is also the United States District Chaplain for the Third Order of Saint
Pius X, and he serves the Society’s Chicago mission, Our Lady Immaculate,
on weekends and holy days.
The author wishes to acknowledge as his primary source the following
invaluable book: Halligan, Nicholas, O.P. The Administration of the Sacraments.
Staten Island, NY: Alba House, 1963.
The limits were 22 for the diaconate and 21 for the subdiaconate. The 1983
Code has raised the limit for priests to 25 and deacons to 23.
2
This has nothing to do with the common adage that confirmation makes one
a “soldier of Christ.” Being a soldier is normally consequent upon being an
adult, and confirmation primarily gives one a supernatural adulthood. See
St. Thomas’s reasoning in S.T., III, Q. 72, art. 1.
3
The new code still requires a Profession of Faith but not the Oath.
4
This is still the practice in the Society of St. Pius X, despite the fact that the
new code has a different set-up.
5
One man who contacted the author was considering receiving ordination so
that he would not have to drive a long way in order to assist at Mass; he had
no intention of quitting his job.
6
The only thing to note about these letters is that they may be required in the
case of a man who has lived in more than one diocese since growing old
enough to incur irregularities or impediments. Their purpose is to help to
establish his freedom from these.
7
This is not necessary for a religious ordinand.
1

www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

8

E d w i n

F a u s t

THE ULTIMATE
ROMANCE
The life and death of St. Isaac Jogues
The conclusion of the short biography
of St. Isaac Jogues, S.J., begun in the
March 2010 issue of The Angelus

CONCLUSION
The Hurons made it to land, and there the battle
raged. Isaac’s canoe was upset near the shore and he
was dumped into some tall reeds that concealed him.
There he remained briefly, but suddenly emerged,
walking unarmed into the midst of the battle. The
Iroquois were startled and amazed.
Isaac had seen a Huron, a catechumen, wounded
by a musket shot and feared he may have been
dying. So, cupping some water in his hands, he
walked into the mayhem, knelt and baptized him.
The Huron convert, Atieronhonk, survived and
later recounted the incident: “Ondessonk forgot
himself at the sight of danger. He thought only of me
and my salvation; he feared not to lose his own life,
but feared lest mine should be lost forever.”
During the same battle, two of the lay workers
attached to the Jesuit missions, William Couture
and René Goupil, were also captured. Couture had
escaped and could have continued on, but he had
vowed not to leave Isaac. So he returned and an
Iroquois, upon seeing him, pointed a musket at his
chest and pulled the trigger. But the gun misfired.
Couture then fired his own gun, killing the war chief.
The Iroquois fell upon him, tore out his
fingernails and ran a sword through his right hand.
Isaac went to him and held him in his arms, telling
him to offer his suffering to God. The Iroquois were
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

initially stunned by this behavior, then attacked the
priest, beating him until he was unconscious; then,
to bring him to, they tore out his fingernails and
chewed his forefingers. Goupil was treated likewise.
When the Iroquois had triumphed, they bound
their prisoners: 20 Hurons and 3 Frenchmen. But
when they tried to bind Isaac, he told them there
was no need: he would never leave so long as they
held his friends captive. So they left him untied and
loaded their prizes into their canoes.
The Iroquois were Mohawks, one of the five
nations of the Iroquois, whose territory covered
central New York state. The Iroquois were as fierce
as they were ambitious. They had decided upon
a war of extermination against the Hurons and
Algonquins and were determined to drive out the
French. Their allies were the Dutch.
Montmangy was wisely distrustful of his Indian
allies, whose sentiments were ever volatile, and he
refused to give them firearms. The Dutch had no
such scruples. They cultivated the fur trade among
the Indians and saw the French as their rivals in
commerce as well as in religion: the Dutch were
mostly Calvinists. They gave the Iroquois muskets,
which in turn gave the Iroquois superiority in battle
against the other tribes and made them, in some
measure, the equal of the French.

9

It took 13 days for the war party to bring their
prize captives to the village of Ossernenon. Before
they arrived there, on the eve of the Assumption
1642, another war party met them and formed a
gauntlet. The captives were stripped and beaten
savagely. Isaac was especially “caressed,” as he was
not only French, but one of the sorcerers the Dutch
had warned them of. He was beaten unconscious
and had to be dragged up the hill.
The following days comprise a catalogue of
horrors painful to describe. The captives were led
through three villages and at each village the same
pattern of unspeakable tortures awaited them.
Thumbs were sawed off; fingernails torn out; fingers
chewed to nubs; flesh burnt by flaming torches;
blows and kicks administered continuously. At night,
the prisoners would be staked to the ground naked
and the children would amuse themselves by placing
hot coals on their bodies to see if they could shake
them off.
Eustace Ahatsistari and the two other Huron
chiefs were condemned to be burned to death,
but not until the Iroquois had had their fill of
tormenting them in every way they could imagine.
Couture was given to the family of the chief he had
killed, who eventually adopted him. The rest of the
Hurons were awarded to various families, who were

permitted to kill, enslave or adopt them. Isaac was
made a slave, as was Goupil.
But Goupil was not to live long. Word reached
the village that the Iroquois had suffered a major
defeat at the hands of the French, who had
established a fortress on the Richelieu River. The
Iroquois were enraged and the French captives
would be made to pay. Less than two months
after their capture, Goupil and Isaac were walking
together in the woods near Ossernenon when they
were met by two braves who took up a position
behind them. When they entered the village, one
brave produced a tomahawk from beneath a blanket
and split Goupil’s head.
But it was not entirely the French rout of the
Iroquois that precipitated his death, although it may
have hastened it. He had taught an Indian child to
make the sign of the cross a few days earlier, and
the head of the clan had decreed that he must die
on this count. It was only a matter of time before the
decree would be acted on by a brave eager to kill a
Frenchman.
Earlier in their captivity, Goupil had asked to
take the vows of a Jesuit brother. Isaac had received
him in the name of the Society of Jesus. So Goupil
became the first Jesuit martyr.
For 14 months Isaac led the life of a slave.
He was made to do the work of a squaw. As one
historian has remarked of the Indians, their women
were their mules. He had to bear great burdens
during the hunts and to endure relentless abuse and
ridicule. Attempts to ransom him failed. During a
visit to a Dutch settlement he was offered the means
to escape, but refused. He thought it wrong to desert
the post at which God had placed him. During the
time of his captivity, he counted 70 souls he had
baptized, some of them captives dying on the torture
platform.
Who would be there to offer these souls baptism
and absolution if he left? His life was not about his
own freedom or ease, but about saving souls for
Christ, and to that mission he remained faithful.
Isaac learned, however, that the Iroquois
were planning a massive assault upon the French
and intended to execute their plan by means of
treachery: they would parley peace, then attack. He
managed to write a letter of warning and dispatch it
to Montmangy through an Iroquois chief who had
been a Huron but was adopted by the Mohawks.
The chief, unaware of the letter’s contents, thought
it an excellent ruse for getting close to the French
before they were aware of his real intentions. In
the letter, Isaac had urged that no consideration
of his personal safety should prevent the governor
from taking immediate action. Upon reading it,
Montmangy pointed his artillery at the Iroquois and
opened fire.
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

10
Word of Ondessonk’s warning to the French
and the defeat of the Iroquois traveled back to
Ossernenon. His death was decreed. But Isaac was
with a trading party at Fort Orange at the time, so
the Iroquois would wait for his return. The Dutch,
meanwhile, who had come to feel a great respect
and affection for Isaac, learned of what awaited him
if he returned to Ossernenon. They urged him to
escape and arranged the means. Isaac realized that
he could no longer minister to the captives or dying
Iroquois if he were executed, so he agreed.
Still, the Dutch were frightened. They first
moved Isaac to a ship anchored in the Hudson, then
moved him back to town and hid him, just in case
the Iroquois became unmanageable and they would
have to surrender him to save themselves. In all of
this Isaac acquiesced, not wanting to be the cause of
suffering for the Dutch, nor to place his own desires
above the designs of Providence.
But the story of Isaac Jogues’ captivity and
torments, some of it coming through reports from
the Dutch, had spread to France, where the Jesuit
Relations were read and recounted with the sort of
interest now accorded to great adventure novels.
Isaac had not only become a hero to his fellow
Jesuits, but something of a national celebrity. Word
of his trials reached the Queen Regent, Anne of
Austria, who insisted that the Netherlands arrange
for his release and return. The Director General
of New Amsterdam received an order to secure
the freedom of Father Jogues immediately. He in
turn ordered the commander of Fort Orange, Van
Corlear, to deliver Father Jogues to him.
Van Corlear tried to bribe the Iroquois, with
the price reaching 300 guldens, but they stubbornly
refused. Finally, he admitted that Ondessonk was
under his protection and that if the Iroquois did
not agree to his ransom, the Dutch would no longer
trade with them.
Trade with the Dutch gave them the source of
their superiority over the other tribes–firearms–
and the Iroquois would not risk losing such an
advantage. So, Ondessonk made his way at last to
New Amsterdam, and, thereafter, across the Atlantic
to Cornwall. There, he obtained passage on a coal
boat crossing the channel to Brittany. Near the coast,
at his request, he was rowed ashore.
On Christmas morning 1643, Father Isaac
Jogues set foot on French soil. His one thought
was to hear Mass. As he approached a fisherman’s
cottage, the family watched this curious man in illfitting, beggarly clothes and an oversized sailor’s cap
make his way across the sands. Who and what could
he be?
Isaac greeted them courteously and asked them
where he might hear Mass. There was a monastery
of the Franciscan Recollet Fathers nearby, they told
him, but insisted he needed a proper hat to wear to
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

Church on Christmas morning and provided him
with one, also obtaining his promise that he would
dine with them after Mass.
It had been 17 months since he had heard Mass
and received Communion. First, he confessed. He
later recounted that the one sin of which he was
guilty during his captivity was a “complacency
toward death.” As a Jesuit, he should not have
preferred life to death or vice versa, as the Spiritual
Exercises state.
When he returned to the cottage, the family
noticed his mutilated hands, They treated him with
great kindness, and when they learned his identity,
they arranged for a visiting trader to take him to the
Jesuit house at Rennes. Before he left, the daughter
of the cottage, a little girl, placed in his palm the
few pennies she had been saving. He accepted them
as a gift of love, blessed the people, then set out on
horseback for the 200-mile trek.
When he arrived at Rennes, the porter looked
at the ragged figure suspiciously. Isaac asked to see
the rector, saying he was someone who had news
from Canada. When told this, the rector, who had
been vesting for Mass, asked that the man be shown
in. He immediately inquired if he had any news of
Father Isaac Jogues. The man said he did. The rector
asked if he knew Father Jogues.
“I know him very well,” he replied.
The rector then asked if he were still captive
among the Iroquois or had he been killed?
“No, he is alive and at liberty…and it is he who
speaks to you.”
He then knelt and asked for the rector’s blessing.
It was a memorable Christmas for the Jesuits at
Rennes. And soon, all of France learned of Isaac’s
escape. Queen Anne of Austria requested that he
come to Paris for an audience. Isaac complied.
The slave of the savages stood amid the royal
court, humbly and patiently answering the questions
put to him about the natives of New France and
his own sufferings, all the while keeping his hands
enfolded in the sleeves of his cassock. At last, he was
asked to show those hands.
As he did so, Queen Anne left her throne and
approached Isaac. With tears streaming down her
cheeks, she bent her head and kissed the mutilated
fingers. “People write romances for us,” she said.
“But was there ever such a romance as this?”
To Isaac, his missing fingers and mangled hands
meant only one thing: he could not say Mass. It
was for this reason alone that he grieved over his
deformities. His Jesuit superiors, aided by Queen
Anne, sought a special dispensation from the pope
so that Isaac might be permitted to hold the host
in other than the prescribed manner. Pope Urban
readily granted the dispensation, writing: “It would
be shameful that a martyr of Christ be not allowed
to drink the Blood of Christ.”

11
Isaac had suffered among
the Iroquois, and now he was
suffering among the French.
The public adulation that
greeted him everywhere was a
trial to him, as it chafed against
his humility. And he also felt
that time spent in France was
time lost among the Indians,
where he knew he belonged.
His one burning desire was
to return to the Iroquois as a
missionary.
His Jesuit superiors
acquiesced to his petitions and
in May 1644, having been in
France less than six months,
Isaac was on a ship bound for
New France. Before he left, he
visited his mother in Orleans.
What must she have felt as
she ran her fingers tenderly
over the knife scars and burn
marks on his face and neck
and held his hands in hers? He
said Mass in her presence and
placed the host on her tongue.
Before he departed, her face wet with tears, she said
to her dear Isaac, “Adieu till we meet again, though
it may not be until we meet in Heaven.”
In June, for the second time in his life, Isaac
approached his paradise, not as a young man with
dreams of spiritual adventure, but as a tried warrior
steeled to renew the combats he knew so well.
He learned that the Iroquois had become an even
greater menace during his absence. They were
engaged in a renewed campaign of genocide against
the Hurons and Algonquins and terrorized the
French settlements.
Isaac was sent to Montreal, an outpost
established only a few years earlier and now under
fierce assault by the Iroquois. There, he tended
to the physical and spiritual needs of the sick and
dying.
By the following summer, the contending
parties all agreed to a parley in Three Rivers. The
Iroquois delegation was surprised to see the former
slave, Ondessonk, seated in a position of honor
next to the powerful chief of the French, Governor
Montmangy. The council dragged on, for the
Indians were fond of oratory. The key to securing
peace was an agreement to the terms of the treaty
by the Mohawks. An ambassador would have to
accompany the Iroquois deputies back to a council
of the chiefs and argue the advantages of ceasing
hostilities. Ondessonk was the obvious choice, for
no one understood the language and habits of the
Iroquois better than he.

It was decided that he should
not appear in his cassock, but
rather in doublet and hose, as he
was to be a representative of the
governor, not a missionary of the
Church. He agreed.
He traveled south, coming for
a second time to Lake George but
able to appreciate for the first time
its placid beauty. He called it the
Lake of the Blessed Sacrament,
for it was on the eve of Corpus
Christi that he made his way into
its waters.
He visited first the Dutch at
Fort Orange and repaid them
the 300 guldens they had given
for his ransom, then went on
to Ossernenon, the place of his
torture and captivity. A council
was convened at which Ondessonk
presented wampum belts as peace
Detail of a mosaic
offerings and urged the chiefs
in the Cathedral
to accept the terms agreed upon
Basilica of St. Louis,
during the Three Rivers peace
St. Louis, MO.
parley.
The Mohawks agreed, but
told Isaac that he and his Algonquin companions
must leave immediately or risk meeting returning
Iroquois war parties unaware of the truce. Isaac
returned to Quebec and delivered the assurances
given him by the Mohawks. Both the governor and
his Jesuit superiors refused to accept the words of
the Mohawks at face value, for all the Iroquois were
notoriously treacherous and frequently violated the
most hallowed traditions among the Indians to gain
an advantage over an enemy.
Experience counseled patience: wait and see
whether the Mohawks were sincere. Isaac asked
that he be allowed to return and spend the winter
at Ossernenon as a missionary, rather than a
government envoy. The Jesuits held their own
council and agreed that it would be imprudent to
allow Isaac to return until the Mohawks had proven
their good faith, but they said that should some
favorable opportunity arise, it should be taken as
Providential and his return allowed.
The opportunity came. The Hurons decided to
send a deputation to the Mohawks in September
to discuss further details of the peace. Isaac was
allowed to accompany them. But no sooner did he
learn that his request to return was granted, than he
was seized with fear. He remembered the torture
platform and his fingers being chewed to pulp. He
also had a strong premonition that his death was
imminent. He wrote to a Jesuit friend in France: “Ibo
et non redibo.”–I will go but I will not return.
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

12
While en route, the party met some Indians
who told them the Mohawks had broken the peace
and were on the warpath. The Hurons immediately
deserted Isaac and his young companion, Jean de
Lalande. Lalande, like Rene Goupil, was a donné,
that is, a layman who had taken a private lifelong
vow to serve the Jesuits in the missions.
Isaac and Jean paddled on until they reached the
point of land at which they had to leave their canoe
and proceed through the forest.
Meanwhile, an epidemic had struck Ossernenon.
The blame fell on Isaac. On his earlier visit as a
government emissary, he had anticipated returning
in his role as priest, to which end he had left a
black box with the old woman with whom he had
lived during his time of captivity. It contained Mass
utensils and some books. He unlocked it in the
presence of several Indians to satisfy any suspicions
about its contents, then locked it again.
Some Huron captives, fearful of their fate,
tried to ingratiate themselves with the Mohawks
by telling them that the plague was the work of a
demon in Ondessonk’s black box. The explanation
was accepted; the black box was sunk in the middle
of the river, still locked so that the demon could
not escape, and war parties dispatched to capture
Ondessonk and bring him back to answer for
his evil. They intercepted Isaac and Jean in the
forest, stripped and beat them, then led them into
Ossernenon in triumph.
Isaac was taken to the cabin where he had been
a slave, there to await his execution, which he was
told would occur the next day. But the evening
before he expected to die, October 18, a member
of the Bear Clan, always the most hostile to the
Blackrobes and the French, invited him to a feast.
He could not refuse, although he expected treachery.
As the flap was raised for him to enter the dwelling,
a tomahawk came down upon his head, and he fell
to the ground, dead. His head was immediately cut
off and, with wild whoops of triumph and defiance,
the Mohawks placed it on a stake in the palisade,
facing their enemies to the north.
Jean, hearing of Ondessonk’s death, wanted
to salvage some relics from his body, which the
Iroquois had thrown on the ground outside the
lodge where he was killed. But braves were watching
for Jean, and as he left his cabin, a tomahawk split
his skull. His head was placed alongside Isaac’s on
the palisade, and two more names were added to the
role of the eight Jesuits who would become known
as the North American Martyrs.
The tide of history has largely erased the tribes
who once roamed the mostly uninhabited reaches
of the vast wilderness of the Eastern seaboard and
its great lakes and rivers. The Wyandots, about
3,000 in Quebec and smaller groups scattered about
what used to be the Indian Territory in the United
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

States, are said to be a remnant of the kingdom
of Huronia. Epidemics, wars, and the relentless
incursion of European immigrants accounted for the
virtual disappearance of the other Indian nations.
If you type the word “Iroquois” into an Internet
search engine, you will learn about the amenities
and rates of a luxury hotel by that name in midtown Manhattan. Mohawk is known primarily as the
name of a carpet company or else refers to a punk
hairstyle.
The Jesuits, too, bear little resemblance to the
order that formed Isaac Jogues and his martyred
brothers in religion. And I wonder: if a band of
Jesuits such as Isaac Jogues could be found these
days, and were they to land on the shores of the
New World as presently constituted, would they not
feel in some way as their forefathers in the Faith felt
about New France: that here is a barbarous land, its
morals dissolute; its people ruled by their demon
gods of lust and greed and violence?
And how would they set about the work of
conversion? Their first problem would be that which
confronted Isaac and his confreres: language. How
could they communicate the truths of the Catholic
faith to a people for whom the words sin and virtue,
grace and sacrament, salvation and damnation are
sounds without meaning? Or words from a dark past
from which they believe that they had emerged into
the light of the present?
And, indeed, conversion is all the other way
now: it is the barbarians who proselytize the
Catholics, or what remains of us. And we who
hold to Tradition, are we not somewhat like the
Wyandots, the scattered remnant of a once great
race of believers?
But we know that the Church will endure.
We need not know the number of the elect. But
we can be certain that among them will be those
whom Isaac Jogues baptized and absolved. And
like Isaac, we should remember that no amount of
effort should be spared if it might save a single soul,
including our own.
St. Isaac Jogues, and you children of the
wilderness whom he saved, pray for us.
Edwin Faust is a retired newspaperman who writes for Traditional Catholic
publications and lives in New Jersey with his wife, Kathleen. They have
three sons.

RECOMMENDED READING
A great many books have been written about the North American Martyrs. Two
that can be highly recommended for scholarship and style are:
Saint Among Savages by Francis Talbot, S.J. (New York and London: Harper
and Brothers, 1935); reissued by Ignatius Press in 2002.
Saints of the American Wilderness by John A. O’Brien (Appleton-CenturyCrofts, Inc., 1953), originally titled The American Martyrs; reissued in
2004 by Sophia Institute Press.

ESTONIA
Riga

LATVIA

LITHUANIA
Vilnius

M a x i m

K a r a l i o u ,

CATHOLIC
TRADITION IN

Minsk

M . A .
POLAND

Warsaw

BELARUS

Lodz
´

Prague

CZECH REP.

BELARUS

Kraków

Kiev

Lviv

GEORGIA

UKRAINE

SLOVAKIA
Bratislava

Budapest

HUNGARY

RUSSIA
13

MOLDOVA

ROMANIA

BULGARIA

This article is about the history, development, and present
situation of Catholic Tradition in Belarus (or Byelorussia–
former part of the Soviet Union, independent since 1991).
Historical Background
Catholicism in Belarus goes back very far and
had a long historical development. As early as
the ninth century, Western missionaries set foot
on Belarusian soil. In the early 11th century the
first Catholic diocese was established in Turaǔ
(Turov), in southern Belarus; soon, however, it was
liquidated again by Prince Wolodymyr (whom the
Orthodox call “St. Vladimir”), the ruler of Kievan
Rus’, who personally accepted the Eastern variety of
Christianity from Byzantium. The Catholic bishop
of Turaǔ was thrown into prison, where he died. The
diocese was re-established as an Eastern-rite eparchy.
Catholicism in Belarus became a widely popular
religion with the Union of Krevo in 1385, an

arrangement between the Kingdom of Poland
and the Grand-Duchy of Lithuania (which at that
time included within its territory Belarus and parts
of Ukraine and Russia). Toward the end of the
14th century, Belarus had six Catholic parishes.
Gradually, Catholicism became the state religion.
This trend was fostered by the Union of Brest in
1596, which united the Orthodox (bishops of the
Polish-Lithuanian state, who had been subject to
the Patriarchate of Constantinople) with the Roman
Catholic Church. (The formerly Orthodox clerics
who thus became Catholic were henceforth called
“Uniates” or the “Greek-Catholic Church,” yet
they retained the Byzantine Rite and the Julian
Calendar.) During this time St. Josaphat Kuntsevich
(Archbishop of Polotsk, Martyr, and defender of the
Union of Brest), and St. Andrew Bobola (who was
also a martyr for the Catholic Faith,) worked for the
salvation of souls in Belarus.
In the late 18th century, Poland-Lithuania was
partitioned between Russia, Prussia, and Austria
(in the so-called First Polish Partition of 1772.) The
Belarusian territories were acquired by the Russian
Czar, which drastically changed the situation of the
Catholic Church for the worse. At that time there
were 517 Catholic parishes in Belarus with more than
one million faithful (21 percent of the population).
Together with the Greek Catholics [“Uniates”], they
made up 93 percent of Belarus’s population, which
then amounted to five million. All Catholic parishes
of the Russian Empire were then combined into one
diocese, the Archdiocese of Mogilev (modern day
Mahiliou), although the only Roman Catholic major
seminary was located in St. Petersburg.
After the annexation of Belarus to the Russian
Empire, a forcible transfer of Belarusians from
the Roman Catholic Church to the Russian
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

TURKE

14
Orthodox Church began. The measures used to
compel conversion were further intensified after
the anti-Russian uprisings of 1830-1831 (First Polish
Rebellion/November Rebellion against Russian
heteronomy) and 1863-1864 (Second Polish Rebellion
to regain national independence). In the year 1832
alone 199 Catholic monasteries and convents in
Belarus were closed. In 1839, the Greek-Catholic
Church was officially dissolved at the Synod of
Polatsk; a persecution of Catholic priests began.
Churches and monasteries were dispossessed of
their lands and transformed into Orthodox houses of
worship.
This persecution continued until 1905, when Czar
Nicholas II, under pressure from the First Russian
Revolution, signed an Edict of Tolerance. Within
the next year, more than 170,000 people returned
to the Catholic Church. Thus, before the October
Revolution in 1917, there were again 456 Catholic
parishes with 917 priests and almost 2.5 million
faithful in Belarus.
After the October Revolution in 1917 the Soviet
power began its cruel persecution of all churches.
Churches and monasteries were closed and turned
into clubs, gymnasiums, grain silos, barns, prisons,
and worse. Many church buildings were summarily
blown up. This barbarism continued even after
World War II: altars and icons were burned, church
organs destroyed, relics of saints desecrated. Priests
and lay faithful were exiled to prison camps, thrown
into jail, or killed on the spot. During this time
many gave witness to the faith through their heroic
martyrdom. After the publication of the Encyclical
Divini Redemptoris by Pope Pius XI in 1937, which
condemned Communism, only four Catholic
churches remained in all of the U.S.S.R., and not a
single one in the Soviet Republic of Byelorussia.
At the beginning of World War II, western
Belarus, which until 1939 had belonged to Poland,
was also added to the Soviet Republic of Byelorussia.
In that region there were still 416 Catholic churches,
but religious persecution began there as well. Yet the
beginning of the war against Germany prevented
the Church from being totally destroyed in western
Byelorussia. The German Occupation in 1941-1944
permitted the reopening of many Orthodox and even
Catholic churches. After the end of the war, however,
almost all of them were closed again; the persecution
of the clergy resumed. The number of priests
decreased by half in the years 1946-1950.
Although in 1946 (shortly after the end of the
war) there were still 387 Roman Catholic parishes,
in 1951 there were only 154, and in 1986 only 86
remained.
In the years during the Second Vatican Council
and afterward, many illegal groups of Catholic faithful
lived in the “underground,” without the ministry of
a priest. Unfortunately they could not practice their
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

faith as the Church intended and were forced to limit
themselves to prayer and the Rosary. Their children
were usually only baptized, for which a priest was
secretly invited to the home. If that ever became
known to the authorities, a child could be expelled
from school, forbidden to attend university, and the
parents could lose their jobs. As a result of this, in
the 1980’s, only seven percent of the inhabitants of
Byelorussia still described themselves as Christian
believers. The complete isolation of Soviet Catholics
from the rest of the world also meant that in the early
1990’s, Holy Mass was still celebrated according to
the old pre-conciliar Missals. The traditional liturgical
vestments were still being used even in celebrating
the New Mass.

Present Situation of the Liberal
Catholic Church in Belarus
With the year 1989 began the reawakening
of religious life in the territories of the Soviet
Union. After its collapse, this process accelerated
considerably. Confiscated churches were returned to
the faithful and new ones were built. Yet to this day
there is still an acute shortage of houses of worship,
liturgical vestments, and furnishings.
The process of renewing religious life also
produced the phenomenon of the so-called
“accidental parishioners,” i.e. people who were not
following the call of their faith but attended parishes
seeking their own advantage: humanitarian assistance,
free rides, etc. Over the last five years, however, they
have disappeared again for the most part.
The clergy who were active in Byelorussia during
the Soviet period had received their training in the
seminaries of Lithuania and Latvia. Meanwhile,
however, the stifling influence of the Polish clergy
made itself felt as it began to take charge of more and
more parishes in Belarus. This can be explained by
the fact that the Belarusian and Polish languages are
closely related. Before our own seminary in Belarus
was opened, the priests for my country were educated
in Poland. The Polish clergy now began actively to
implement the norms of the Second Vatican Council
in parish life. The lay faithful, who for many long
years had lived without the ministry of a priest,
trusted their new priests completely and carried out
all their demands. They accepted without protest the
liturgical innovations—for many of them this was their
first and only acquaintance with the “Catholic” ritual.
They thought that Catholics had been praying like
that from time immemorial.
The proportion of believers (in comparison with
those who professed no faith) in the population of
Belarus increased steadily and leveled off at the
turn of the 21st century at 50 percent. Of them,
the majority are Orthodox (75 percent), with 18
percent Roman Catholics, 2 percent Protestants of

15
various denominations, and 1 percent each of Greek
Catholics, Jews, and Moslems—out of an overall
Belarusian population of 9.7 million.
The Constitution of the Republic of Belarus
guarantees freedom of religion throughout the
country and acknowledges the equality of religions
before the law. Church and State are separate. In
the Constitution, the decisive role of the Orthodox
Church is specially highlighted, but also the role of
the Catholic Church, which cannot be overlooked in
the history of the country, as well as the contributions
of Lutheranism, Judaism, and Islam to the national
culture.
Today, Belarus has more than 500 Roman
Catholic parishes, divided into four dioceses: the
Archdiocese of Minsk-Mahiliou, and the Dioceses
of Hrodna, Pinsk, and Vitebsk. The Belarusian
Catholic Bishops’ Conference comprises six bishops.
Since 2007 they are led by Archbishop Tadeusz
Kondrusiewicz. The majority of the bishops have
liberal views.
In Belarus there are now two Catholic major
seminaries, where more than 70 clerics are being
trained. There are religious vocations to the
Dominicans, Franciscans, Marians (Marians of
the Immaculate Conception), and others. The
principal religious orders of men are the Capuchins
(O.F.M.Cap.), the Marians (M.I.C.), the Priests of the
Sacred Heart (S.C.J.), and the Salvatorians (S.D.S.);
among the religious orders of women are the Sisters
of the Holy Eucharist (C.S.S.E.), the Servite Sisters
(O.S.M.), and the Sisters of the Precious Blood
(C.P.S.).
Despite the modernist bent of a significant
part of the episcopate, clergy and religious, the
Catholic Church in Belarus is nevertheless extremely
conservative. Communion in the hand and the
distribution of Communion by lay people are
forbidden in Belarus. Priests are obliged to wear
a cassock (a rule that is sometimes honored in the
breach). The Rosary and various devotions (litanies,
the Novena of Divine Mercy, the Lamentations) are
still popular. The Lamentations, which are common in
Eastern Europe, are a sung meditation that is chanted
before Mass on the Sundays in Lent. They consist of
an introduction, a prayer intention, a hymn, a lament
of the soul over Jesus’ sufferings, and a conversation
of the soul with the Mother of God. These texts are
all found in 19th-century prayer books, but also even
today in Polish missals for the laity. Only boys or men
may serve at the altar (but even this rule is already
violated in many parishes).
Unfortunately, many priests actively promote
among the youth the introduction of pop music
with guitar and drums at Mass and contribute to
the spread of ecumenical worship services in the
Taizé style. Many young priests are opposed to the
Rosary and strive to limit the celebration of Holy

Mass to 30 minutes. In Belarus a community of the
Neocatechumenate is active.
It must also be noted that in Belarusian society
the tradition of a fixed territorial membership in a
parish is unknown. Many city-dwellers do not attend
the church in their neighborhood but go where they
like it best, or else attend Mass alternately at various
places. The local territorial parish is regarded as being
responsible only for the sacraments of Baptism and
Matrimony and for Requiem Masses.

Roman Catholic
Tradition in Belarus
In retrospect, the revival of Catholic Tradition in
Belarus in recent years came about in three phases of
development:
The first phase began in the year 1991 when the
Society of St. Pius X, in the person of Fr. Gérard Mura
from the Seminary in Zaitzkofen, began to preach
the Spiritual Exercises of Saint Ignatius of Loyola in
Minsk at irregular intervals. He was supported and
accompanied in this ministry by Brother Klaus.
In the spring of 1994, Fr. Karl Stehlin was
appointed superior of the Fraternity’s Mission in
Eastern Europe and industriously began to develop
a ministry in Poland, Lithuania, and Belarus. At his
instigation a group of the lay faithful made efforts to
register the resulting parish/community with the State.
A second phase is characterized by the work of
this young parish/community of the Society of St.
Pius X in Minsk, which is now called “Devotees of
the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” It was finally registered
on February 11, 1995, and thus recognized by the
civil authorities. The question immediately arose, of
course, as to a suitable place for the celebration of
Holy Mass. Over the course of the next five years, the
faithful were compelled to rent a series of apartments
and houses in various districts of Minsk, which made
it difficult for the spiritual life of the community to
develop. The liturgies did not take place regularly
during that time. Only in 1999 did they succeed in
obtaining a private house in Minsk and establishing a
permanent chapel there.
Since 1996, Fr. Werner Bösiger, FSSPX, from
Switzerland, serves there as the priest.
Since December 1994 a quarterly magazine, Pray
For Us!, has been published, which communicates
to its readers the Church’s traditional teaching on
various questions, explains the position of the Society
on contemporary problems, and reports on recent
news from the Catholic world.
Since 2005 the Society has also had a special
Internet website (www.fsspx.of.by) for Belarus and
the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS).
The third phase began after the promulgation
of the Motu Proprio of Pope Benedict XVI on July
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

16
7, 2007, liberalizing the use of the Mass of all ages.
This permission to celebrate the Tridentine Mass was
welcomed with joy in several parishes in Belarus.
The obstacles placed by the local bishops’ chanceries,
however, significantly slowed this process.
The best prospects are still in Vitebsk, in the
Cathedral parish of St. Barbara, which is staffed by
the Dominican Fathers. This can be explained by the
following circumstances:
First, the pastor of the parish, who is at the same
time the Superior of the Dominican Friars in Vitebsk,
Fr. Michal Jermaszkewicz, O.P., holds traditional
positions and publicly opposes pseudo-Catholic
innovations in liturgy and parish life. Because of this,
his appointment as spiritual director to the priests of
the Diocese of Vitebsk was not renewed.
Second, in 2002, an ecumenical faculty of
theology was inaugurated at the State University in
Vitebsk. Among the instructors assigned to it was
Msgr. Jerzy Józef Sobkowiak, Ph.D. († 2008), who
for the last twenty years of his life had served as a
priest of the Archdiocese of Paderborn (Germany).
He organized three summer courses for the students
in Germany, where he also introduced them to
Catholic Tradition and the Society of St. Pius X (at
the summer session in Schönenberg conducted by
Dr. Barth in 2005). For many of the students this
determined their subsequent attitude toward Catholic
Tradition and Modernism in the Catholic Church.
Unfortunately Msgr. Sobkowiak died a year ago.
He was not a member of the Society of St. Pius X,
but thanks to his commitment and prayers, a group
of laypeople soon formed in Vitebsk which even
before the promulgation of the Motu Proprio by Pope
Benedict XVI was making initial attempts to organize
celebrations of the Traditional Mass in Vitebsk.
Third, the Bishop of Vitebsk, Vladislav Blin—
although he takes extremely liberal and modernist
positions—is one of those clerics who wants to
be liked by everyone. So he did not forbid the
celebration of Tridentine Masses in addition to
the regularly scheduled Novus Ordo Masses at St.
Barbara Cathedral in Vitebsk. And so three Holy
Masses in the traditional rite take place here each
week: on Sundays at 3:00 p.m. and on Saturdays and
Mondays at 6:00 p.m., and also on all major feast
days and for important events. As a result, a stable
group of faithful from various parishes in Vitebsk was
soon formed who go to the cathedral to participate in
the traditional liturgy exclusively.
In 2008 Fr. Vitalij Sapegi, O.P., was ordained a
priest by Bishop Blin. That same evening Fr. Sapegi
celebrated his First Mass—in the old rite!
Several other priests have already declared their
interest in the traditional rite, but they are afraid
of displeasing the chancery staff and modernist
parishioners. Catholic parishes in Belarus are very
small; many of them can scarcely support their priest
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

and their house of worship—if they have a place
at all. This financial dependence on the diocesan
chancery and the Polish parishes (which contribute
to their support) forces them to show loyalty to
the innovations. The Polish priests, who constitute
around 40 percent of the Catholic clergy in Belarus,
generally have a negative attitude toward the Society
of St. Pius X and Catholic Tradition, which for them
was completely replaced by the teaching of Pope
John Paul II.
To conclude, I would also like to point out
several essential problems and difficulties that must
be overcome in expanding the activity of the Society
in Belarus and in spreading Catholic Tradition in
general.
Human psychology: As I mentioned at the start,
members of a parish can often be divided into two
groups: Some look to the Church as part of their
search for God, but others do so for the purpose of
overcoming material difficulties and getting a few free
rides. This is typical not only of the Society’s parish
in Minsk, but in general for all congregations of all
denominations in Belarus. This problem cropped up
with the unsupervised activity of various Protestant
sects in the early 1990’s in Belarus, as our country
was going through a severe economic crisis. These
sects lured the people with various material benefits,
until the State prohibited the involvement of religious
communities across the board in humanitarian
assistance. Distributing clothing and food was now
permitted only for special organizations, such as
the charitable association “Houses of Mercy,” etc.
Any neo- or pseudo-Protestant congregations that
violated that prohibition lost their state registration
and their status as a legal person. Their houses of
worship were closed. People who were only after
material assistance now switched to the Orthodox
and Catholic churches, which routinely fund
humanitarian assistance through their eparchies and
dioceses. Those people do not believe in God and are
only seeking their own advantage, especially during
the Easter and Christmas seasons. If they do not
obtain what they desire, they stop showing up after a
while and don’t come back. The appearance of such
people in large numbers has meanwhile diminished
considerably, but there are still individual cases—
especially since the beginning of the recent global
economic crisis.
For most Catholics today, the Novus Ordo is
the only rite in the Catholic Church that they know.
Many believe that the Catholic liturgy has been
like that since the Middle Ages. Participating in
the traditional Rite is something completely new to
them. Therefore we can fittingly describe Catholic
Tradition in our country as “the old that is ever new.”
Some people, when they first run into the traditional
liturgy, have problems with the Latin, yet as a rule
no one stays away for that reason. Based on our

17

Fr. Werner Bösiger, FSSPX, in Belarus.

Fr. Joseph Persie, FSSPX.

experiences in Vitebsk we can say that for Belarusians
as a rule, ritual does not play a decisive role. For
instance more than 200 people attended Midnight
Mass on Christmas Eve in St. Barbara Cathedral in
the hallowed traditional rite; the number of those
who attended the Midnight Mass in the new rite,
which began later, was not significantly greater.
Overall the situation with regard to numbers
attending worship services is not very encouraging. In
the SSPX parish in Minsk around 30 persons come
regularly to Holy Mass. The situation is similar in
Vitebsk, which makes it impossible at the moment to
found a separate traditionalist parish.
Financial trouble: Contributions from the faithful
in most parishes are meager. A Mass stipend costs
the equivalent of around 2.5 Euros (US $3.75). In
St. Barbara’s Cathedral in Vitebsk not more than
around 100 Euros (US $150) is collected at the five
Sunday Masses (four in the new and one in the
traditional rite.) This money is just barely enough to
cover the cost of heating the church from October
to April. Without outside financial and material help
the parishes cannot support either their house of
worship or their priest. Catholic priests in Belarus are
not paid salaries through church taxes, but live (as
do the priests of the Society) solely on the donations
of the faithful for celebrating Holy Mass for various
intentions, for blessing houses, automobiles, and so
forth. Many priests are also forced to travel to Poland
to substitute for a priest there and, in addition, to
earn something for their livelihood.

The Society of St. Pius X to this day has no
church building of its own in Minsk. Not too long
ago a parcel of land was allotted to it by the city (so
that they could build their own church). But that
requires considerable funds, which the congregation
does not presently have at its disposal. Moreover the
Modernists obstruct plans to build by their intrigues.
It is especially difficult to obtain land for construction
in the capital city of Minsk. Often a request for such
a construction permit goes up the chain of command
almost to the President. Therefore the Modernists try
to swipe the land from the Society so as to build their
own church on it.
Pastoral difficulties: The Society of St. Pius X runs
only one parish in the capital of Belarus. There are
however interested lay faithful in other cities and in
the countryside as well. Unfortunately the Society
still has no priest of Belarusian nationality who could
valiantly address these problems and also settle
matters with the civil authorities. People used to make
a special trip to Vitebsk from as far away as Moscow,
for example, where the Tridentine Mass is celebrated
only once a month. The Dominican priest and
cathedral pastor Michal Jermaszkewicz from Vitebsk
sometimes unofficially substitutes for Fr. Bösiger
at Sunday Mass when the latter has to travel. Still,
Vitebsk and Minsk are 186 miles apart, which causes
difficulties.
Lack of church supplies: The problems in the
Modernist parishes of the Catholic Church are of a
similar nature. Many old churches were blown up in
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

18
the Soviet era or sustained considerable damage to the
interiors. Where the walls, at least, are still standing,
the old high altars did not weather the storm and are
gone. During the period of reconstruction (after the
collapse of the Soviet Union) only table-altars were set
up. In the newly built churches high altars were not
designed as a matter of principle. In order to celebrate
the old rite, then, the “people’s altars” have to be
supplemented by special decorations, which are then
taken down again after Mass is over. The attempt to
erect side altars, meanwhile, is viewed by the diocesan
chanceries as “pathological.” Such statements came
from that quarter this past year with regard to the
erection of a side altar in honor of the Blessed Virgin
Mary in St. Barbara’s Cathedral in Vitebsk. To this
day Bishop Blin has not yet consecrated the altar! We
already have plans, though, to set up a second side
altar….
Liturgical vestments and furnishings are also in
very short supply. Initially many Mass vestments,
stoles, and maniples were pieced together from
different sets at various parishes. Meanwhile orders
are being placed for new sets of liturgical vestments.
There are problems also with regard to chalices,
censers, etc. These liturgical items have to be
consecrated, but the bishops view this as no longer
necessary. Therefore traditionalist Catholics have to
go looking for old liturgical appurtenances which were
consecrated before the Second Vatican Council. The
same is true of the liturgical books and breviaries.
Although it was relatively simple to hunt down old
Missals, obtaining the other liturgical books has
proved to be difficult.
The organs in many Catholic churches are being
replaced by electronic synthesizers. In Vitebsk an
organ was installed only in St. Barbara’s Cathedral.
Founding a schola for the Gregorian chant likewise
presents major difficulties. Essentially only the
simple melodies are sung, for instance the Ordinary
of Mass VIII (Missa de Angelis). In Belarus, both
in the Orthodox and the Catholic churches, the
choir is made up, not of parishioners, but rather of
professional singers with good voices—but they require
payment for their services.
For the usual Sunday Masses there are enough
altar servers as a rule. Yet not all parishes have
enough of them for a Solemn High Mass with incense.
As for relations with the Modernists, I would like
to describe briefly and separately those of the Society
of St. Pius X and those of the other traditionalists
in Vitebsk. Until 2006, while Cardinal Kazimir
Swiontek—who celebrated that year his 70th year of
priesthood—was still the ordinary of the Archdiocese
of Minsk-Mahiliou and President of the Belarusian
Conference of Catholic Bishops, his attitude toward
the Society was cool but tolerant. While the see
remains temporarily vacant, the resident Bishop
Demjanka suggested to Fr. Bösiger, FSSPX, that he
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

leave the Society of St. Pius X and place himself under
his jurisdiction, offering to allow him to continue
celebrating only in the traditional rite. One can only
speculate about the real purpose concealed behind
this suggestion.
The occupation of the episcopal see in Minsk
by Archbishop Tadeusz Kondrusiewicz in 2007
marked the beginning of a covert battle against
Tradition. Obstacles are placed in the way of building
churches. Priests in Modernist parishes are forbidden
to celebrate Masses in the traditional rite until they
have personally passed an examination given by
Archbishop Kondrusiewicz. For the second year we
are trying, unsuccessfully, to have the traditional
liturgy included in the program of the All-Belarusian
Festivities at the national Marian Shrine in Budslawa,
which are attended each year on July 2 by more than
7,000 pilgrims. This year more than 100 signatures
were collected in Vitebsk alone (whereas only 20
were necessary). (Belarusian law requires a minimum
of 20 believers, who must also be citizens of the
Republic of Belarus, in order for a parish church or
congregation to be registered with the state; therefore
20 is generally regarded as the “necessary minimum”
for a serious matter.) [Note by C. Brock.] We received
no response to our petition—the old Mass was not
admitted. All this is evidence of a growing resistance
of the Modernists to the revival of Tradition in our
country.
Increased pressure from Minsk on the other
Belarusian dioceses is forcing the traditionalist faithful
and priests in Vitebsk to seek cover with their local
bishop and to avoid public confrontation with the
bishop’s chancery. The local bishop, of course, has
few ways of shutting someone out of the Church, but
he can have a priest who says the Traditional Mass
transferred to a remote locality. Recently the Russian
branch of Una Voce expressed interest in collaborating
with the traditionalist Catholics in Vitebsk. The center
of the Russian subsidiary of Una Voce is located in
Moscow; there are only a few members and their
chief accomplishment is the celebration of Holy Mass
in the Tridentine Rite in Moscow once a month.
At the moment we are examining the possibility
of membership or collaboration with Una Voce in
Moscow. Consultations with the Society of St. Pius
X on this matter have already taken place. For now
we favor the solution of founding our own Belarusian
branch of Una Voce, so as to appease the bishop’s
chancery, which is afraid of possible ties between the
faithful and the SSPX.
We hope that with God’s help all our problems
will find a solution. We ask you for your prayers for
our concerns.
Translated from Russian into German by Christina Brock, M.A., Munich, and
then from German into English by Michael J. Miller, M.A. Theol., Philadelphia.
The author is a parishioner of the SSPX in Vitebsk, Belarus. This article is the
transcript of a lecture given in Munich.

THE ANGELUS ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTICLE REPRINT

Let your speech be “Yes, yes: no, no”; whatever is beyond these comes from the evil one. (Mt. 5:37)

●

April 2010

Reprint #91

”
O
I
S
U
F
N
O
C
M
U
R
O
N
A
C
I
L
G
“AN
Some Initial Reflections on
the Apostolic Constitution
Anglicanorum Cœtibus

It is still too soon to evaluate the recent institution of Personal Ordinariates
by the Holy See in order to welcome groups from the Anglican Church who
no longer feel at home in their original denomination because of the blessing
of homosexual unions and the administration of the [purported] sacrament of
orders to declared homosexuals and women.1 Our intention is not to address
all the problems raised by the Apostolic Constitution; however, the delicate
question of ecclesiastical celibacy inevitably springs to mind as well as the
repercussions the situation could have even though it is presented as transitory.
Also, we think that it would be unjust to pass over or to minimize because
of related problems an indubitably positive aspect: the quest for union with
Rome by a significant portion of the Anglican Church.

The Canterbury Cross–
Symbol of the Anglican
Use Society.
“Anglican Use” has two meanings. First, it refers to former
congregations of the Anglican Communion who have
joined the Catholic Church
(Latin Rite in par ticular)
while maintaining some of
the features of Anglicanism.
These parishes were formerly
members of the Episcopal
Church in the United States
of America and were allowed
to join the Catholic Church
under the Pastoral Provision
of 1980 issued by Pope John
Paul II. Anglican Use parishes
currently exist only in the
United States. Many Anglican
Use priests are former clergy
of the Episcopal Church and
most are married. (www.
wikipedia. org)
19

THE ANGELUS ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTICLE REPRINT

It is about this last fact that we should like
to reflect and say a few words. This event is not,
technically speaking, the fruit of ecumenism, which
does not aim at conversion, and has given rise
to a certain uneasiness among the great icons of
interreligious dialogue: Cardinal Kasper, for example,
hastened to interpret what has happened in light of
freedom of conscience and not in light of the need for
non-Catholics to return to Catholic unity. It involves
a typically ecumenical reading, about which we shall
say more before concluding.
However, before developing this point, we should
like to reflect on the ecclesiological presuppositions
that make up the dogmatic and spiritual baggage of
Anglicans and on the ecclesiological premises of those
who receive them: the affair seems a bit confused and
raises some unavoidable questions.

A Strange Tradition
That gay marriages, women priests, or the
ordination of homosexuals can be shocking even in
England and in the Anglican communion, we can
readily understand; nor are we surprised by the fact
that over the centuries a church could have strayed
further and further away from the right path and
from the Gospel, which only the Catholic Church
keeps in its entirety. However, to be Catholic, it is
not enough merely to flee these aberrations. The
Anglican Church was born as a national Church and
developed around–and under–the British crown,
forging and conveying over the centuries a resolutely
anti-Roman, caesaropapist, autocephalous tradition. If
over the course of the last few decades its dependence
on the British sovereign has become more and more
virtual (what’s more, this dependence practically
does not exist outside the United Kingdom), the same
cannot be said of the autocephalous and anti-Roman
character proper to the Anglican tradition.
We ought therefore to wonder what part of this
ecclesiology, which is not only the fruit of theological
errors but also the expression of a fundamental
attitude that can scarcely be corrected by flight from
the accidental aberrations evoked above, has really
been denied. In other words, one may legitimately
wonder whether the “flight” far from the most
extreme aberrations of contemporary Anglicanism
has contributed sufficiently to remedy an inherent,
structural ecclesiological deformation that is the
ancestral patrimony of the Anglican tradition.
It is true that the “High Church” has outwardly
kept a considerable resemblance with Roman liturgy
and externals. But it would be erroneous to attribute
this to a theological and ecclesiological tradition
substantially different from other groups within the

20

Anglican communion, that is to say, more papist and
pro-Roman.
These premises having been laid, one remains
perplexed by the intention expressed by the Vatican
to keep alive the Anglican tradition, which is even
treated as an enrichment for the Roman Church and
as a gift to be shared, notwithstanding the request that
they adhere to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Here is how Fr. Gianfranco Ghirlanda, S.J., Rector of
the Pontifical Gregorian University, expressed it in
the Holy See’s official bulletin:
It is clear from a careful reading of the Apostolic Constitution and of the Complementary Norms published by the
Apostolic See that the provision of erecting Personal Ordinariates is intended to respond to two needs: on the one hand
the need “to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral
traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic
Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members
of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared” (Ap. Cons.
III); on the other hand the need to fully integrate into the
life of the Catholic Church groups of faithful, or individuals,
coming from Anglicanism.
The enrichment is mutual: the faithful coming from Anglicanism and entering into full Catholic communion receive
the richness of the spiritual, liturgical and pastoral tradition
of the Latin Roman Church in order to integrate it into their
own tradition, which integration will in itself enrich the Latin
Roman Church. On the other hand, exactly this Anglican tradition–which will be received in its authenticity in the Latin
Roman Church–has constituted within Anglicanism precisely
one of those gifts of the Church of Christ, which has moved
these faithful towards Catholic unity.2

Then follows a list of seven points detailing how the
Vatican intends to protect the Anglican tradition.3
Henry VIII himself would probably have been
perplexed by them.
Fr. Ghirlanda’s reasoning is nothing else than
the application of the typically conciliar theological
schema according to which all the Christian elements
present in non-Catholic churches would be elements
of the Church of Christ (an entity transcending all
the churches, including the Catholic Church) and
propelling them towards the fullness which only the
Catholic Church possesses. In reality, the Christian
things that historical Anglicanism, for example,
possesses belong, rather, to the Catholic Church,
from which they were taken and thanks to which and
upon which a schismatic national church was built.
The Jesuit’s reasoning is exactly opposite, and it is
only comprehensible in light of the ecclesiological
dynamics of the Council, to which subject we shall
return below.
As regards the specific nature of the Anglican
tradition, confusion reigns. It is hard to understand
how a schismatic tradition qua schismatic can be an
enrichment for the Catholic Church and why as
such it ought to be preserved. Indeed, we are not
dealing with a tradition belonging to the common
patrimony of the Catholic Church, as would be
the Ambrosian tradition; we are dealing with a
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

False
Ecumenism and
True Charity

O

n September 22, Cardinal
Bagnasco, president of the
Italian Bishops’ Conference,
met with the rabbis Giuseppe Laras,
president of the Italian Rabbinical
Assembly, and Riccardo Di Segni, chief
rabbi of the Roman Jewish community.
He declared that “there is absolutely no
change in the attitude the Church has
developed toward the Jews, especially
since Vatican II,” and “the Church does
not intend to work actively for the
conversion of Jews” (SIR Agency, Sept.
22, 2009).
Cardinal Bagnasco’s statements are
extremely grave and contradict the
words of Jesus, who categorically stated:
“No man comes to the Father, but by
me” (Jn. 14:6); “I am the door. By me,
if any man enter in, he shall be saved”
(Jn. 10:9). All of the Tradition of the
Church has transmitted this doctrine
to us, taught and defined infallibly by its

Teaching Authority [Magisterium]: no
one can be saved without belief in Jesus
Christ and without belonging to His
Church, which continues His work of
evangelization.
The intention not “to work actively
for the conversion” of our neighbor
means discriminating unjustly against
him and culpably depriving him of the
helps necessary for his salvation and
thus exposing him to eternal damnation.
It means the loss of the natural
desire every man of good will has of
sharing with his neighbor the greatest
Good.
It means being unfaithful to the
mandate given by Jesus to His apostles
and, therefore, to His Church: “Go
ye into the whole world and preach
the gospel to every creature. He that
believeth and is baptized shall be saved:
but he that believeth not shall be
condemned” (Mk. 16:15-16).
Where, then, is the true charity that
should urge us to desire the greatest
good for our neighbor, which is the
salvation of his soul?
All of that makes us think of the
parable of the Good Samaritan. The
priest, the Levite, the cardinal, pass by
without bothering to help the man

tradition that was born and developed as schismatic
and that, historically, posed as an alternative to
Catholicism. The historical fact that this tradition
has conserved some Catholic elements, such as
baptism, does not mean that the “healthy” core
within the Anglican tradition somehow legitimizes
Anglicanism itself, but it simply attests to the fact
that this tradition originated by its separation from
the Catholic Church, from which it “borrowed”
something that did not belong to it specifically. To
say, consequently, that the Anglican tradition qua
Anglican can be an enrichment for the Catholic
Church, or that it led to unity and that it thus
ought to be maintained as such in the bosom of the
Catholic Church, to which it never belonged and of
which it has always been the enemy, is an absurdity
that is incomprehensible except through a conciliar
optic, and, more exactly, in light of Lumen Gentium.

stripped and wounded by bandits. Only
the Good Samaritan stoops down to
help him and save his life.
The Catholic Church has always
wanted to be the Good Samaritan to
all men that are far from the Faith by
preaching the Faith and proposing it
to them for the sake of their eternal
salvation. This has nothing in common
with the principles of false ecumenism
of Vatican II, which are echoed in the
assertions of Cardinal Bagnasco…for
the greatest spiritual ruin of souls.
It is a shame that the Italian bishops,
as was foreseeable, did not rend their
garments before this episcopal outrage
given to the Redemption of our Lord
and to the mission of His Church; only
Msgr. Luigi Negri spoke up on this
question in the pages of Il Timone, No.
87, November 2009.
Let us pray that the Church and
her ministers rediscover the missionary
fire that generates missionaries ready
and willing to give their lives for the
preaching of the Gospel and the
salvation of souls that depends on it.
—Don Pierpaolo Petrucci, La Tradizione
Cattolica, No. 4, 2009.

The Problem
of Priestly Celibacy
Among the elements proper to the Anglican
tradition being safeguarded by the Apostolic
Constitution is “the concession that those who were
married Anglican ministers, including bishops, may
be ordained priests.”4 It is true that in the past the
Church has already granted ad casum this permission
to Anglican ministers who converted to Catholicism.
However, the practice was justified in the name of
the tolerance due to the particular circumstances
of these individual cases. Presently, what was once
conceded on a case by case basis is being inserted as
one of the specific elements of the Anglican tradition
which the Church welcomes and engages itself to
conserve as an enrichment and a gift to be shared.

THE ANGELUS ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTICLE REPRINT
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

21

THE ANGELUS ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTICLE REPRINT

The two perspectives are not only different, but also
resolutely irreconcilable. Consequently, and here
things worsen:
The safeguarding and nourishing of the Anglican tradition
is guaranteed…4 by the possibility that, following a process of
discernment based on objective criteria and the needs of the
Ordinariate (CN Art. 6 § 1), the Ordinary may also petition
the Roman Pontiff, on a case by case basis, to admit married
men to the priesthood as a derogation of CIC can. 277, § 1,
although the general norm of the Ordinariate will be to admit
only celibate men (Ap. Cons. VI § 2).5

The provision immediately brings to mind,
without exaggeration or preconceived ideas, the
Trojan horse. Even if the possibility described
above is foreseen ad casum, it has already been
institutionalized in black and white: it concerns not
only the ministers who are converting now, but it
opens a new prospect for the future, that is to say, for
candidates to the priesthood who shall come forward
in the future.
Considering that the desire to abolish
ecclesiastical celibacy is far from dead in the Catholic
world, and that the concession granted to Anglicans
as an element of their tradition is defined as “a
precious gift” and “a treasure to be shared,” one has
to wonder whether “the enrichment is mutual,” as
Father Ghirlanda suggests.
The emerging situation strikes us as inimical
to the preservation of ecclesiastical celibacy: this
would not be the first time that the modification of a
common and universal praxis began by a concession
of apparently limited scope, but potentially of the
direst consequences.

The Risk of Private Judgment
The assimilation of the Anglican tradition in
the terms described by the Apostolic Constitution
and by Fr. Ghirlanda immediately conjures up the
multiple possibilities of which this proceeding could
be the prototype. Why not include in similar fashion
the Lutheran, Calvinist, Waldensian, or Adventist
traditions? The method used and useable again in the
future seems extremely dangerous to us for a very
specific reason: The Vatican restricted itself to asking
of the Anglicans their adherence to a written text: the
Catechism of the Catholic Church.
But we should not forget that the Protestant world,
to which the Anglicans belong, has private judgment
as its universal criterion of interpretation, which it
applies to a written text: the Bible. Consequently, to
do nothing more than to provide Protestants with a
written text and ask them to subscribe to it is to risk
creating an extremely equivocal situation. The reason
is this: For a Catholic, the Catechism is a document
he must receive insofar as, through it, he is receiving

22

the Church; Protestants, on the contrary, based on
their mindset and ecclesiastical tradition, receive
the written text, but not the superior authority that
governs its interpretation. In other words, Catholics
do not accept a text simply because they accept its
meaning, but because they accept the authority of
God being expressed through the Church. Protestants,
on the contrary, limit themselves to assenting or
not assenting to a text in the measure that they find
it acceptable. This, in the last analysis, is the really
specific characteristic of the Anglican and Protestant
tradition.
And if one considers that the Catholic world
at present also seems to have lost the notion of an
infallible, and hence authoritative, Teaching Authority
[Magisterium] to interpret Revelation, the emerging
situation seems even more chaotic.

The Dynamism of
the Church of Christ
We have already mentioned above the theological
justification for this development, purportedly
prompted by the Holy Spirit leading the Anglicans
into the Church:
Those Anglican faithful who, under the promptings of the
Holy Spirit, have asked to enter into full communion with the
Catholic Church have been moved towards unity by those
elements of the Church of Christ which have always been
present in their personal and communal lives as Christians.
(Ibid.)

The matter merits our full attention.
In the conciliar perspective, this development is
not attributed to the refutation of error and adherence
to truth, but to the fruition of the Anglican tradition
itself, which, possessing certain elements of the
Church of Christ, would have been continuously in
movement towards fuller unity (as, moreover, would
be all the other Christian denominations):
…this Anglican tradition–which will be received in its
authenticity in the Latin Roman Church–has constituted
within Anglicanism precisely one of those gifts of the Church
of Christ, which has moved these faithful towards Catholic
unity. (Ibid.)

For this reason–and it is this, ultimately, which
constitutes the novelty–the Anglican tradition
is preserved and received as a positive element
(“precious gift”) in the bosom of the Catholic Church.
This principle is nothing else than the emblematic
and telling application of the doctrine contained in
the conciliar Constitution Lumen Gentium, which is
quoted by the Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus:
This single Church of Christ, which we profess in the
Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic “subsists in the
Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter
and by the Bishops in communion with him. Nevertheless,
many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside
her visible confines. Since these are gifts properly belonging
to the Church of Christ, they are forces impelling towards

THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

Catholic unity [Dogmatic Constitution Lumen
Gentium §8].

According to this doctrine, the Church
founded by Jesus Christ (the Church of
Christ) no longer simply coincides with the
Catholic Church, but to a larger reality,
elements of which are also present in the
other denominations, even though the
Catholic Church possesses them fully.
Consequently, as we have already shown,
membership in another Church (in virtue
of the material possession of something
Christian) is never seen as separation from
the Catholic Church, but rather, at the
very least, as an element of an imperfect
union with her. In other words, if I am truly
and authentically Anglican, I am virtually
already Catholic, and this would be so not in
the perspective of my giving up my Anglican
confession, but thanks to it: that is why
the Anglican tradition must be maintained
as such; that is why being received into
the Catholic Church no longer means
categorically renouncing Anglicanism.
What seems to be lacking, to employ
traditional terms, is the classical notion of
conversion, which is replaced by a dynamic
process ascribed to the promptings of
the Holy Ghost, who would make use of
membership in a false church as a positive
means of attaining the true. Without entering
into theological considerations, but in
simply staying with the facts, it is obvious
that this reasoning does not stand up: what
propelled the Anglicans “out” of their
communion and “towards” Catholicism
were not positive elements belonging to the
Church of Christ, but aberrations like the
ordination of homosexuals. The ordination
of a gay bishop is not in itself an element
apt to unite churches, but God also makes
use of evil to draw forth good, and over this
we may rejoice. That is all. To derange the
Holy Ghost by wishing to make Him the
engine of the ecumenical process described
in Lumen Gentium and then apply it to the
recent events seems to us a scarcely credible,
strained, ideological interpretation that
simply does not correspond to the reality of
the facts.

Ecumenism:
Cardinal Kasper’s
Difficulty
Naturally, we desire nothing else than
the genuine and serious conversion of
the Anglicans in question, and we can
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

But we should not forget that the
Protestant world, to which the
Anglicans belong, has private
judgment as its universal criterion
of interpretation, which it applies
to a written text: the Bible.
Consequently, to do nothing more
than to provide Protestants with
a written text and ask them to
subscribe to it is to risk creating
an extremely equivocal situation.
The reason is this: For a Catholic,
the Catechism is a document he
must receive insofar as, through
it, he is receiving the Church;
Protestants, on the contrary, based
on their mindset and ecclesiastical
tradition, receive the written text,
but not the superior authority that
governs its interpretation. In other
words, Catholics do not accept a
text simply because they accept
its meaning, but because they
accept the authority of God being
expressed through the Church.
Protestants, on the contrary, limit
themselves to assenting or not
assenting to a text in the measure
that they find it acceptable. This,
in the last analysis, is the really
specific characteristic of the
Anglican and Protestant tradition.

23

THE ANGELUS ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTICLE REPRINT

only rejoice over it. The reservations expressed
are merely linked to the contingent situation at
hand, and especially to the confusion to which the
ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium inevitably gives rise
in cases like this. We rejoice for a simple reason: we
know that God can draw straight with crooked lines,
and thus nothing can prevent a genuine conversion
in spite of a thousand negative or unfavorable
circumstances.
But not everyone thinks this way. The first to
be embarrassed was Cardinal Kasper, the leader of
dialogue with the other Christian confessions. It
is clear that for him, the event of the conversion
to Catholicism of an Anglican group is not
advantageous to the cause of ecumenism. Let us
take a look at why. Two years ago, Kasper had
already succeeded in stopping a request similar
to the current Anglican request. He asked this
group to stay in its own church, promising that
the Vatican would be working to help it within its
own denomination. The reason is clear: if today’s
false ecumenism promotes unity, it never does so
by proposing conversion to Catholicism as the one
sheepfold, but it does so by giving worth to the
common elements present in all the denominations,
which are consequently respected and recognized as
instruments of salvation. In this perspective, unity is
the fruit of dialogue, of understanding, of common
prayer, of sharing, of brotherhood, of exchange, of
mutual enrichment…but never of conversion.
To ask for conversion would be tantamount
to denying the status of legitimacy ascribed to the
other churches, which represents the platform for
dialogue itself. In this sense, ecumenism can only
be “anticonversionist,” otherwise the obligatory
presuppositions enabling it to exist would disappear.
But there is more to the present case.
Since the group that addressed Rome represents
only a part of the Anglican obedience, its reception
into the Church inevitably causes an internal split
within the Anglican Communion for which the
Catholic Church is indirectly responsible. The
matter could seriously compromise the ecumenical
efforts and dialogue with the authorities of
Anglicanism, things which are absolute priorities
for Kasper. In effect, in these conditions an icon
of dialogue like Kasper does not make a good
impression on the Archbishop of Canterbury, who
might feel frustrated and deceived after decades
of dialogue, openings, mutual aid, promises of
support… This explains Kasper’s reluctance of two
years ago.
It especially shows the contradictions of
ecumenism and its incompatibility with Catholic
doctrine, with the missionary nature of the Church,

24

and with is mission to preach the truth to every
creature.
To escape his difficulty, Kasper gave an
interview last November 15 in the columns of
L’Osservatore Romano. The tone of the interview is
of course extremely positive, but a few interesting
things will not escape the notice of those who know
how to read between the lines.
First and foremost, Kasper assures us, with
the emphasis typical of someone who is mortified
and must defend himself, that ecumenism is not
in danger, and his subsequent statements are
marshalled to develop this fundamental idea; every
statement to the contrary would be nothing more
than some journalistic scoop, and the Cardinal is
extremely bothered.
Relations with the Archbishop of Canterbury
would be excellent, according to Kasper’s narrative.
However, the Anglican primate telephoned Kasper
“in the middle of the night” while he was in Cyprus
to ask him for some explanations. Now, for a
reserved English gentleman, who is moreover an
archbishop, to disturb a cardinal in the middle of the
night is at a minimum the sign of a deep malaise that
can scarcely be brushed away, that is to say, by the
repetition of a few stereotyped promises typical of
ecumenical dialogue.
Concerning the causes for the Anglican group’s
approaching the Catholic Church, Kasper tries
by every means to demonstrate that it is not his
fault, nor the fault of ecumenism, as if he had to
justify something negative that no one was able
to avoid. Above all, he breathes a sigh of relief by
underscoring that “Not all of those who disagree
with these novelties want to become Catholics.”
It is as if he said: “We decline any responsibility
in case of conversion,” by demonstrating that
every Anglican acts freely without any preliminary
Catholic persuasion.
Then the Cardinal returns emphatically to the
same idea: he has nothing to do with it, he is not
to blame. Between the lines, his embarrassment
is perceptible. “Let’s stick to the facts. A group of
Anglicans has asked freely and legitimately to enter
the Catholic Church. This is not our initiative.”
Indeed: “This is not our initiative.” During all these
long years of dialogue and meetings, there has
not been the least invitation nor the least allusion
to conversion; only hollow words. The call to
conversion has been replaced by dialogue, and
consequently, when a conversion happens, despite
the omissions on the Catholic side, it is necessary to
justify both the conversion and oneself!
Kasper’s thinking and his difficulty become even
clearer: “If an Anglican, or a group of Anglicans,
wants to enter into full and visible communion
with the Catholic Church, it is impossible for
us to oppose it.” The matter is so obvious that
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

L

The Primate of
the Anglican
Church’s
Dissatisfaction

ast November 19, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, spoke
at Rome during a symposium organized by the Pontifical Council for
Promoting Christian Unity to celebrate the centenary of the birth of
Cardinal Willebrands (d. 2006), the first president of the Council. Of course,
he could not fail to bring up the Constitution Anglicanorum Cœtibus.
On the one hand, the prelate appreciates the fact that the Apostolic
Constitution “shows some marks of the recognition that diversity of ethos
does not in itself compromise the unity of the Catholic Church, even within
the bounds of the historic Western patriarchate.” Here he is clearly alluding
to a married clergy which, in a way, has also acquired a rightful place in the
West among the Catholic clergy of Latin rite. In short, Williams also sees, as
we do, the Apostolic Constitution as a significant recognition [of a married
clergy] and a definite step forward toward a possible ulterior result. Naturally,
the prospect of a reverse influence, i.e., an enhanced appreciation of clerical
celibacy among Anglicans, does not appear to be of interest to him and was
probably never conveyed in ecumenical dialogue with Cardinal Kasper.
As for the return to the Catholic Church of an Anglican group, Williams
does not see it as a good outcome of interreligious dialogue; rather, it is a sign
that the Catholic Church does not recognize the Anglican Communion’s full
legitimacy, and this does not live up to the expectations that had been held
out for ecumenical dialogue. Williams, like Kasper, has well understood what
ecumenism means. Despite the calm, academic tone of the address, a certain
disappointment is perceptible: for Williams, too, ecumenism has suffered a
blow:
[I]t should be obvious that [Anglicanorum Cœtibus] does not seek to do what
we have been sketching: it does not build in any formal recognition of existing
ministries or units of oversight or methods of independent decision-making, but
remains at the level of spiritual and liturgical culture, as we might say. As such, it is
an imaginative pastoral response to the needs of some; but it does not break any
fresh ecclesiological ground. It remains to be seen whether the flexibility suggested
in the Constitution might ever lead to something less like a “chaplaincy” and more
like a church gathered around a bishop. [Here the scorn is less well concealed.]…
All I have been attempting to say here is that the ecumenical glass is genuinely halffull….6–Don David Pagliarani, La Tradizione Cattolica, No. 4 (2009)

his assertion would be something ridiculous and
inexplicable on the lips of a cardinal if one were
unaware of the underlying unease.
In order to avoid any further misunderstanding,
Kasper adds that not only did he not have anything
to do with it, but neither did ecumenism as such:
“Ecumenism is one thing, conversion another.”
The Cardinal concludes with a solemn promise
not to proselytize, not to resort to “conversionism”
towards anyone, neither in the East nor the West.
According to him, proselytism involves methods that
belong to the past and that are no longer viable for
the present or future.
But then, we wonder, what can justify an
uninvited conversion, which carries the unavoidable
risk of tearing apart the internal unity of the church
of origin and of creating serious misunderstandings?
Here Kasper brings up the panacea to all evils
and contradictions: “We must respect the conscience

www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

and freedom of conscience.” Yes, even if it goes
against ecumenism and good relations with the
Archbishop of Canterbury, unquestioned supremacy
of the conscience is universally recognized and no
one will be able to accuse the Church of actively
working for anyone’s conversion. But here Kasper
demolishes in a single blow the one true foundation
that legitimates conversion: adhesion to the Truth.
In his interview, Kasper never mentions the need
to adhere to the Truth, to the true Church, and to the
true Faith. He does not make the slightest allusion
to the fact that the salvation of the convert’s soul
depends on conversion. His argumentation, with its
socio-political tenor, on one hand demonstrates the

THE ANGELUS ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTICLE REPRINT

25

This space left blank for independent mailing purposes.

$2.00 per SISINONO reprint. Please specify.
historical failure of ecumenism, and on the other its
inability to join itself with Truth, its unconcern for
the salvation of our neighbor, its anti-missionary
essence, and, once again, its inherent incompatibility
with Catholic faith and praxis.
—Don David Pagliarani, La Tradizione Cattolica, No.
4, 2009.

SHIPPING & HANDLING

5-10 days

2-4 days

Up to $50.00
$50.01 to $100.00
Over $100.00

USA

For eign

$4.00
$6.00
FREE

25% of
subtotal

Up to $50.00
$8.00
$50.01 to $100.00 $10.00
Over $100.00
$8.00

FLAT FEE!

($10.00 minimum)

48 Contiguous
States only.
UPS cannot
ship to
PO Boxes.

Available from:
Benedict XVI, Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, providing
for personal ordinariates for Anglicans entering into full communion with
the Catholic Church, November 4, 2009.
2
Fr. Gianfranco Ghirlanda, S.J., “The Significance of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus,” Official Bulletin of the Holy See, November
9, 2009.
3
“The safeguarding and nourishing of the Anglican tradition is guaranteed:
1. by the concession to the Ordinariate of the faculty to celebrate the
Eucharist and the other sacraments, the Liturgy of the Hours and other
liturgical celebrations according to the liturgical rites proper to the
Anglican tradition and approved by the Holy See, without, however,
excluding liturgical celebrations according to the Roman Rite (Ap.
Cons. III);
2. by the fact that the Ordinary may determine specific programmes of
formation for seminarians of the Ordinariate living in a diocesan seminary, or may establish a house of formation for them (Ap. Cons. VI §
5; CN Art. 10 § 2); the seminarians must come from a personal parish
of the Ordinariate or from Anglicanism (CN Art. 10 § 4);
3. by the concession that those who were married Anglican ministers,
including bishops, may be ordained priests according to the norms of
the Encyclical Letter of Paul VI Sacerdotalis coelibatus, n. 42 and of
the Declaration In June, while remaining in the married state (Ap. Cons.
VI § 1);
4. by the possibility that, following a process of discernment based on
objective criteria and the needs of the Ordinariate (CN Art. 6 § 1), the
Ordinary may also petition the Roman Pontiff, on a case by case basis,
to admit married men to the priesthood as a derogation of CIC can. 277,
§ 1, although the general norm of the Ordinariate will be to admit only
celibate men (Ap. Cons. VI § 2);
5. by the fact that the Ordinary may erect personal parishes, after having
1

26

ANGELUS PRESS

2915 Forest Ave., Kansas City, MO 64109 USA

Phone: 1-800-966-7337
www.angeluspress.org

consulted with the local Diocesan Bishop and having obtained the
consent of the Holy See (Ap. Cons. VIII § 1);
6. through the capacity to receive into the Ordinariate Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic life coming from Anglicanism,
and of erecting new ones;
7. by the fact that, out of respect for the synodal tradition of Anglicanism:
a) the Ordinary will be appointed by the Roman Pontiff from a terna
of names presented by the Governing Council (CN Art. 4 § 1); b) that
the Pastoral Council will be obligatory (Ap. Cons. X § 2); c) that the
Governing Council, composed of at least six priests, apart from fulfilling
the duties established in the Code of Canon Law for the Presbyteral
Council and the College of Consultors, will also exercise those duties
specified in the Complementary Norms which include in some cases
giving or withholding consent or of expressing a deliberative vote (Ap.
Cons. X § 2; CN Art. 12).” Ibid.
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.
6
Text of Williams’s speech is online at www.archbishopofcanterbury.org.

THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

TELEVISION
27

THE SOUL AT RISK

PART 5

This is
the fifth
installment of
a series on
television.
It was
originally
published as a
book by Clovis
in France
(Clovis is
the publishing
house of the
French district
of the SSPX).
The series
will continue
every month in
The Angelus.

I s a b e l l e

D o r é

TELEVISION AND THE WILL
Information, knowledge of the world, and instruction are often only
pretexts to justify the purchase of a television set, and even if this motive
is genuine on the part of most families, what ought to be a tool of learning
and culture, an indispensable object that will enable the children to
participate in classroom discussions, very quickly becomes something else.
It is used, not for self-improvement, but for relaxation, pleasure, euphoria.
The use of television is generally for leisure rather than learning.
The Church teaches us that leisure is legitimate since we need
recreation, but certain conditions are necessary for our leisure activity
to be morally good: 1) The pastime must not be sinful: some dances
and some spectacles are dangerous. 2) Due measure should be observed
so that we avoid too much dissipation, which upsets the soul’s balance,
and spend neither too much time nor money (which makes us lose our
gravitas). 3) We should be sure that the circumstances do not transform
leisure into sin. For example, watching a football game is in itself a morally
indifferent act. It becomes a sin, however, if one chooses to watch the
game instead of attending Mass on Sunday, which we see happening more
and more in parishes.
Can audiovisual entertainment, and television in particular, be ranked
among indifferent and harmless pastimes along with cards, golf, or board
games? We ought to acknowledge that, if the activity in itself is morally
indifferent, the risk of dependence and the concrete circumstances (the
programming) dictate a negative response. This leisure-time activity
quickly becomes a drug one cannot do without and for which one readily
sacrifices one’s duties of state, the attention one should pay to one’s
neighbor and to God, and one ends up by watching everything (and
anything) provided that one finds the desired pleasure.
Dangerous pastimes have always existed. The circus games were
dangerous because the spectacle was unworthy of a Christian soul, and
the games unleashed the spectators’ passions. A terrible riot took place
in Thessalonica in 390 over a gladiator adulated by the public. Emperor
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

28

Theodosius commanded the army to put down
the riot: there were 7,000 deaths, and St. Ambrose
forbade Theodosius to go into a church. Secular
literature (Dostoyevsky, Schnitzler) describes
passionate gamblers who lose their fortunes and ruin
their families.
St. Francis de Sales distinguishes three types of
leisure activities: lawful and praiseworthy pastimes
and recreations (tennis, chess, dancing, singing,
hunting), prohibited games (dice and cards1), and
games and pastimes that are lawful but dangerous:
For cards or dancing to be licit we must use them as
recreation and at the same time not have any affection
for them. We may engage in them for a short time but
we must not continue until tired out or stupefied. We
must engage in them only on rare occasions for if we indulge in them constantly we turn recreation into work.2

With television, one passes insensibly from a
lawful recreation to a dangerous pastime, and from
a lawful but dangerous pastime to a pastime that is
dangerous for the soul (either because of the content
or because of one’s affection for it). What should be
a recreation quickly becomes an occupation, and
what should be rare becomes regular.
At the time of St. Francis de Sales, good
Christians and decent people abstained from
improper pastimes under pain of sin. They might
overstep the measure in their use of indifferent
pastimes, but this excess had natural limits imposed
by persons or circumstances: golf cannot be played
day and night; in winter it is too cold, partners are
not always available, the game is expensive, and
you have to go out. Casinos are closed at least some
of the time, and you cannot play bridge while half
asleep and your partners absent.
Movie theaters, videos, and DVDs also have
some limits. For the theater, you have to go out
and pay for a ticket, and thy are not open 24 hours
a day. For DVDs and videos, people normally
make reasonable purchases: we hesitate to buy
the latest trashy movie. One would be ashamed
to display a collection of idiotic DVDs or videos.
One is reluctant to download anything that is not
worthwhile. We tend to build our DVD or video
collection as carefully as our library.
Everyone can keep bad books, bad magazines,
or bad DVDs, and many Catholic priests deplore
with reason that our Catholic families are not
sufficiently vigilant over the content of their video
collection. However, when one has a DVD set
on the art of flower arranging, its use will not be
abused. One cannot over watch the classics one
knows by heart, or a documentary on the history of
aviation. One only watches it when one has decided
to think about it or study it.
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

For television, things are otherwise. There is
no natural limit: one can watch it all day long and
see all kinds of spectacles or news reports without
stirring from one’s house, without making any effort,
even when one is tired, without choosing or by
choosing something easy to digest. In most families,
from the programs available, one chooses to watch
sitcoms, dramas, sports no one plays, or a B film
rather than a cultural program (which will not win a
very big audience share in the ratings).
Once one has begun to watch, it is difficult to
limit one’s viewing. Even well-balanced people
admit as much: “If I had a television, I would
watch it all the time, and I would watch the stupid
programs,” a researcher for a nuclear research
company confided. A teacher said, “At night when I
get home from work, I sit mesmerized in front of the
television.”
Can television watching remain a simple pastime
or a cultural tool without becoming an occupation
or, still worse, a drug? It takes a will of iron to use it
only as a lawful pastime, constant vigilance if you do
not live alone, and strict rules and resolutions, which
unfortunately are easily broken.
Very often, television use resembles drug use.
What are the ingredients of this drug? And what are
the symptoms of a state of dependency?

Television as Drug
Many television viewers recognize it: they watch
television because they experience an irresistible
need to watch something. They would suffer from
withdrawal symptoms if they did not turn on their
set.

The Ingredients of the Drug
A documentary on the raising and milking
of goats or how tractors work has little chance of
seducing TV viewers: to glue them to the set, an
injection of action, and especially of violence, is
required. But the violence must not be constant:
some relief is necessary. Mel Gibson told an
interviewer that he inserted flash-backs in The Passion
of the Christ to afford the viewers some respite from
the overwhelming scenes: that’s a film-maker’s trick,
he explained.
If you happen to catch the afternoon
programming, while visiting a hospital, for instance,
you can observe the alternation of violence
(invariably dramatic news broadcasts: war, fires,
natural catastrophes; police or action movies) and
vacuity: B films, silly games, car racing, stupid jokes,
soap operas, and sitcoms.
Of course, it is not always the same car race,
the same match, or the same episode, but the

29

experience, but there are no processes of thinking, masequence is rather standard: one goes from violent
nipulating, or interpreting going on. The sensations fill
and anguishing spectacles to filler scenes without
the person’s attention, which is passive, but absorbed
much interest. One surmises that behind all this
in what is occurring, which is usually experienced as
lies a calculation, a manipulation: to what end? “I
intense and immediate. Pure awareness is experiencing
spend my days imagining how to hook families
without associations to what is there.6
to the TV and I spend my evenings thinking up
It is not an exaggeration to say that the majority
ways to unhook my children,” revealed Nicolas
of television viewers watch television in
de Tavernost, the first assistant of the
a state analogous to that of pure
Bertelmann Group on M6 (Parisawareness. The mind does not
Match, 2007).
work, does not think, and does
According to Michel
not interpret. Besides: the
Lemieux, a Canadian author,
In the United States and
programs chosen and watched,
the relationship between
in most cases, do not lend
in Germany, volunteers
violent scenes and filler has
themselves to thought.
been carefully calculated,
are
regularly
solicited
to
reduced to a formula, by
Immediacy
the directors of TV stations,
participate in experiments
The drug experience is
the goal being to lengthen
to
study
life
without
intense
and immediate, like
the advertising segments to
that
of
television,
especially
satisfy the advertisers.4 But
television for a given time.
when watching programs
TV viewers get tired of the
The experiments are always
like the ones described
advertising, so they have
above: one need only press a
to be offered sufficiently
encouraging: the volunteers
button on the remote. It may
interesting programming
are very satisfied with life
seem paradoxical to speak
so that they don’t walk
of an intense, immediate
away, a scientifically dosed
without television.They have
experience when we have
mix of violence, action,
more time to talk, to get
seen that the relationship
and filler.5 This author’s
with the real has been
analysis is certainly true to a
together as a family, to play.
mediatized, and we shall see
point; it is obvious that the
that the relationship with
They spend more of their
programming is calculated
others is equally mediatized.
and dosed by experts. As
time working or pursuing a
For, with television, one
for the reasons why they
is no longer connected to
do it, one may dare think
hobby.The family members
reality:
one’s perceptions
it is not simply for the sake
help one another, read, and
are not of real life, which is
of product advertising. One
rather uniform and which
may reasonably think that
listen to music.
leaves much room for reflection
behind these calculations, these
and obliges us to pay attention
manipulations, lie political and
to our neighbor. In real life,
even religious motives.
sensorial shocks are rare. Thus the
When we watch television, we are
experience the viewers get from television is of a
being manipulated by people who want to compel
different kind than that provided by real life. It is
us to stay put. The danger is less with DVDs and
an experience similar to that obtained by the use of
videocassettes, but one can still be caught in the
drugs and which introduces the television viewers,
combine by preferring to watch action movies or
especially children, into the logic of a consumer
trite films and comedies, by always seeking to find
society: having everything, and having it now,
pleasure and relaxation.
while a relationship with the world or other people
is not immediate. What is immediate is emotional
The Symptoms
experience and pleasure.
Drug addicts themselves make comparisons
between drugs and television: on drugs, they relive
Dependence
the state of pure awareness they had experienced
Another analogy with drug use is dependence.
watching television. The state of pure awareness is
We
all
know people (adults or children) who
described by a specialist on drug use:
cannot bear to go anywhere, to leave on vacation
...the person is completely and vividly aware of his
or stay somewhere unless they are sure of having a
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

30

suggestion of sexual impropriety, a few violent
television set at their disposal, or people who cannot
scenes, a mean and dangerous boy; the children and
bear it when their television set is not working.
all the other characters are hard and cruel; the fire at
We also know people whose conversation
the end is deliberate and no longer an accident; the
mainly revolves around the television program
ending is not really happy (no more marriage at the
watched the night before, not really to discuss,
church). The remake terribly lacks a sense of humor.
analyze, or critique it, but to attempt to relive the
scenes and the emotions: “Did you see him fall?”–“It
Disengagement
was awesome.” “Did you see when X
punched Y in the head?”– “It was a
We also observe in TV lovers,
boring.” “It was awesome.”– “Did
as in drug users, a disinterest
you see the towers blowing
in real life (too simple) and
up?”
in volunteer work (too
At the time of St. Francis de
For many children,
constraining, not enjoyable
Sales, good Christians and
teenagers, or elderly people,
enough): school principals
the main preoccupation and
complain of the absenteeism
decent people abstained
the only important question
of parents from school
from improper pastimes
of the day is “What are we
programs. Everyone deplores
going to watch today?” and
how hard it is to stimulate
under pain of sin.They
the only reading that finds
participation in different
might overstep the measure
acceptance in their eyes is the
groups and choirs for lack
television guide.
of volunteers, available
in
their
use
of
indifferent
We have all experienced
and efficient people even if
pastimes, but this excess had
persons in a hospital room
working hours decrease.
who, without a word, have
Parish life is reduced
natural limits imposed by
inflicted their favorite
almost everywhere to the
programs on us as soon as
persons or circumstances:
minimum: even parishioners
they arrived in the room.
who live near the church do
golf cannot be played day
Many adults recognize the
not bother to go to monthly
fact: “We need to turn it on
events in the evening if it
and night; in winter it is
and watch something.”
conflicts with the time of a
too cold, partners are not
Television has often been
film or evening television
presented as an opening to
broadcast.
always available, the game is
the world, but the addicts
One summer camp
expensive, and you have to
very nearly always watch the
director confided: “It is hard
same thing: sports, variety
to keep the young people
go out. Casinos are closed
shows, soap operas, madeoccupied nowadays; trail
at least some of the time,
for-TV melodramas, reality
games don’t interest them the
TV, and sitcoms. They do not
way they did 20 years ago.
and
you
cannot
play
bridge
watch classic films, serious
What they want are strong
while half asleep and your
documentaries, or cultural
emotions: rafting and trips to
broadcasts because they do
night
clubs in the evening.”
partners absent.
not find the sensations they are
“Once they get television,
looking for, and they especially
it’s over for the movement, the
do not want to have to think.
struggle….They doze, they think
A TV addict needs to increase
they’re happy,” a leftist priest complains
the dosage in quantity and intensity to obtain the
in a novel by Michael Saint-Pierre.
same effects; for a teenager today, a big consumer
The celebrity TV host Jacques Martin declared
of movies and TV series, “it’s boring” when there is
in 1992: “I’m a TV man; I do television. And I
not enough violence or special effects.
know that the best way to extinguish reading, to
Interestingly, the remakes of classic films
kill genuine curiosity, to give up travel plans, or to
always include a larger serving of violence and
refuse to go out in the evening, is to turn on that
strong emotions. The Chorus (Les Choristes), a kind
rubbish” (quoted by the newspaper Présent).
of plagiarism of the 1945 film A Cage of Nightingales
(La Cage aux Rossignols), provides a good illustration
of this progression towards violence: the producers
introduced some crude language, a brief verbal
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

31

Dehumanization
What are the effects of television on sensitivity?
The studies are formal: television dulls people’s
sensitivities to real events. The verdict may be
more complex than it seems: on the one hand,
researchers observe that murderous children are
abnormally insensitive. In our society, the words
abortion and euthanasia are bandied as if these
things were banal, natural; on the other hand,
many people have an overly sentimental, emotional
reaction in circumstances in which they should
be especially circumspect and lucid. Everything
depends, no doubt, on what they watch: for some
it is horror movies, for others romances: the effects
are not the same on the sensibility, yet they are real.
This admixture of indifference, egotism, cruelty,
sentimentality, and emotionalism so typical of our
society resembles the behavior typical of alcoholics,
drug addicts, and even the yogis.
Depression
Another effect resembling that of drug use
or alcoholism is the depressive state affecting the
habitual users of television, who display addictive
behavior: like the alcoholic who first drinks to forget
his cares and then drinks to forget he’s an alcoholic,
the TV addicts [“telephages”] first turn to television
to relieve a real suffering: boredom, solitude, or
fatigue, and end up by watching to forget their
inactivity. The TV addicts, moreover, never boast of
spending their time in front of the tube: it is rather
something shameful that they hide. They will never
say: “I had an excellent week: I watched television
eight hours a day.” Those who say “I really enjoyed
myself watching this program; I had a fine time
last evening watching a movie” are not television
viewers with an addictive behavior, but rather
infrequent viewers.
This bulimic consumption of images does not
preclude the consumption of tranquilizers, and most
likely aggravates the depressive state: watching
television does not bring any real help.
Unhappiness
As with drugs and alcohol, the consumers of
television know that television watching does not
bring them happiness. Of course, it is necessary to
distinguish between habitual consumers with an
addictive behavior from the occasional user (but
are there really occasional consumers?), just as it is
necessary to distinguish between the alcoholic and
the moderate consumer and fan of good wine. The
consumers of television know that television does
not make them happy, just as alcoholics or drug
addicts know that their vice does not make them

happy. In questionnaires focusing on moments of
happiness, television is always ranked last by people
who use television a lot.

The Effects of TV on Daily Life
It is very difficult to establish scientifically
the negative effects of television on daily life and
behavior: one can always object that the anomalous
behavior has nothing to do with television. To
verify the effects of television on daily life, the best
procedure is to make a comparative study of life
with and without television.
In the United States and in Germany, volunteers
are regularly solicited to participate in experiments
to study life without television for a given time. The
experiments are always encouraging: the volunteers
are very satisfied with life without television. They
have more time to talk, to get together as a family,
to play. They spend more of their time working or
pursuing a hobby. The family members help one
another, read, and listen to music.
In the work by Marie Winn cited above, the
families that had participated in the 1974 Denver
experiment were all overjoyed by the positive
effects of life without television. Yet, once the
experiment concluded, they all went back to their
former habits of frantic consumption. They regretted
losing the benefits of a life freed from television, but
nonetheless preferred to return to their former state
of dependence, passivity, and regression procured
by the silver screen.
“It’s like with cigarettes,” explained one of the
volunteers who participated in the experiment;
“once the habit is acquired, it is hard to break.”
(To be continued.)
Translated from La Télévision, ou le péril de l’esprit (copyright Clovis, 2009).

When, of course, the games are played for money. Cf. St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Third Part, 31–34.
Introduction to the Devout Life, tr. by John K. Ryan (New York: Image Books), Third
Part, 34, p. 212.
3
Editor’s Note. There would be much to say about the movie Monsieur Vincent, which,
despite its undeniable cinematographic quality, gives a false impression of St. Vincent
de Paul. The man who founded a women’s congregation and a men’s congregation,
giving to the latter three main ends (the sanctification of its members, evangelizing
the rural poor, and sacerdotal sanctity), and who was a tireless apostle and a man of
prayer, becomes, in the image the movie creates, almost uniquely a temporal benefactor
of the needy.
4
Michel Lemieux, L’Affreuse Télévision (Guérin, 1990), p. 31.
5
After all, the “soaps,” or soap operas, the popular melodramatic television series peopled
with stereotyped characters, were at the origin of works produced to be interrupted
by advertisements for soap products, whence their appellation.
6
Marie Winn, The Plug-in Drug: Television, Children, and the Family (NewYork: Viking
Press, 1977), p. 99, quoting from “The Effects of Marijuana on Consciousness,” in
Charles Tart, Altered States of Consciousness (1969).
1

2

www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

32
a r c h b i s h o p

m a r c e l

l e f e b v r e

thE authoRity oF

VatiCaN
ii
QuEstioNEd

PART 4

The Magisterium Is Infallible
Only When It Proclaims Tradition
This is the third part of the spiritual conference
given at Ecône by Archbishop Lefebvre on
September 14, 1975.–Fr. Gleize

Fr. Gleize is a professor of
ecclesiology at the seminary of
the SSPX in Ecône and now
a member of the commission
involved in the doctrinal
discussions with the Holy See.
In 2006, he compiled and
organized Archbishop Lefebvre’s
thinking about Vatican II.
It was published by the Institute
of St. Pius X, the university run
by the SSPX in Paris, France.
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

We are entirely with the pope in everything he says
in conformity with Tradition. But as soon as there are
novelties, things that are new, that do not echo Tradition–
at that moment, the pope is not infallible, he can be
mistaken, and this must not be forgotten. The pope is
only infallible when he speaks ex cathedra and when, in his
ordinary magisterium, he is the echo of Tradition. That is
the way it is.
In the ordinary magisterium, only those things are
infallible which echo Tradition. You have passages in
your pontifical documents in which the pope says: “Our
predecessors so-and-so and so-and-so said this, and We
solemnly repeat what they have said and We confirm what
they have said.” At that moment, the pope is infallible. His
ordinary magisterium is not an extraordinary definition,
but [he is infallible] in his ordinary magisterium when he
repeats everything that has been said since the Apostles;
when he bases himself upon Revelation, the Apostles, the
Fathers of the Church, and on the popes: “This pope said
this, that pope said that, and by our Apostolic authority
We confirm these truths.” Take, for example, Pope Leo
XIII in his encyclical Immortale Dei, where he condemns
the new, liberal rights, all the rights the French Revolution
defended: the right to freedom of thought, freedom of
speech, freedom of conscience, freedom, freedom. Pope
Leo XIII solemnly condemns all of that by repeating
everything his predecessors said. Then the pope is
infallible.

33

But this is no longer so if the pope tells us
something new; for example, when the pope himself
tells us, as did Pope Paul VI in his Introduction to the
liturgy for the new Mass. He said: “We know that the
ancient Mass goes all the way back to Gregory the
Great; we know that this Mass sanctified [many], that
it did much good, and that it is an admirable Mass,
and so forth. However, in order to conform ourselves
to the spirit of modern man…” That is the reason he
gives, that is the motive the Pope invokes: “However,
in order to conform ourselves to the spirit of modern
man and to be closer to him so that he can participate
better in our mysteries, etc., this is what we are
going to do.” He himself says that it is a novelty, an
adaptation to modern man. In that, he is not infallible.

Vatican II Is in
Rupture with Tradition
The spirit of Vatican II is a spirit that destroys the
Church. The new conciliar magisterium is in rupture
with Tradition, as Archbishop Lefebvre explained in a
spiritual conference given to the Ecône seminarians on
September 29, 1975.–Fr. Gleize
It is impossible for us to submit to this spirit that
is destroying the Church. We can see it; the facts
show it to us every day. The spirit that issued from the
Council and the reforms of the Council and the postconciliar orientations is in the process of destroying
the Church in every domain. But we desire to be
firmly attached to Tradition, to the magisterium of all
time, to the successor of Peter as successor of Peter,
and to the master of truth the successor of Peter is,
to the Vicar of our Lord Jesus Christ. If this vicar, by
an incredible design of Providence, by a permission
allowed by Providence; if this vicar leads us,
voluntarily or involuntarily, I do not know, I cannot
judge the Holy Father’s conscience–but if he leads
us toward Protestantism, to neo-modernism and the
destruction of the Church, we are obliged to say no,
no. In all that, it is no longer the successor St. Peter
who speaks to us, it is no longer Tradition that is given
to us, it is no longer the magisterium of the Church of
all time.
So then, no, precisely because we are attached to
Tradition, because we are attached to the magisterium
of the Church of all time, we cannot submit to a
magisterium that destroys this magisterium, that
destroys this Tradition, that destroys the sacraments,
the sacrifice of the Mass, that destroys the catechism
which expressed our faith, that destroys the religious
congregations which expressed what is fairest and
holiest in the Church–the devotion of souls to God

and to the sacrifice of the Mass, to the oblation of
the Mass. It simply is not possible; one cannot both
be attached to all these things that constitute the
Church’s treasure and at the same time dilapidate
them.
Well, well. I desire to keep, I desire to hold on to,
the truth; I hope, and I pray to God every day, that I
will not lead you on the wrong track. Very sincerely, I
do not think that I am, because one cannot be on the
wrong track when one continues what the Church has
done for 20 centuries. We are doing nothing else, and,
as I have told you quite often, you are not following
me, it is not me you are following, it is the Church,
the Tradition of the Church, the faith of the Church,
the magisterium of the Church.
You have the library at your disposition. You can
search in all the books. You can delve into Patrology,
all the theological dictionaries, the history of the
Councils. You have everything at your disposition.
Go and see whether what you are being taught
here is contrary to what the Church has taught for
20 centuries. You have it. You can take the books
and come and tell us: “But what you are saying is
false; here is what the Church has taught for 20
centuries, and you are saying the opposite.” If it
is true, well then, we have nothing else to do than
close the seminary. But it is precisely because we are
so convinced that that is the life and the truth; the
Church could not be wrong for 20 centuries, that is
impossible, or else all these saints who have come
from the Church–all of that is an illusion. And that is
not possible.
So, there has certainly been a break starting with
Vatican II. It is a new spirit, a reform, a new Church,
a liberal Church, a reformed Church like the Church
reformed by Luther, after all is said and done, which
was introduced into the Catholic Church. It is no
longer the Catholic Church. People will say: “But
that is impossible… The Holy Father cannot…” It is
a mystery, which is why one may say that the Holy
Father is not infallible in everything that he says or
does. He is not holy in everything that he does or
says. The whole history of the Church shows this.
So, we had some extraordinary popes for almost a
century, and, of course, we are a bit confused today.
But the facts are there, do what you will. We cannot
deny them.
(To be continued.)
Fr. Gleize is a professor of ecclesiology at the seminary of the SSPX in Ecône and
now a member of the commission involved in the doctrinal discussions with the
Holy See. In 2006, he compiled and organized Archbishop Lefebvre’s thinking
about Vatican II. It was published by the Institute of St. Pius X, the university
run by the SSPX in Paris, France. Although slightly edited, the spoken style has
been preserved.
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

34

Christian unity:
the response to
a silent apostasy?
Concerning the link between
the ecumenism promoted by the
Second Vatican Council and the
“silent apostasy” denounced by
Pope John Paul II in the Apostolic
Exhortation Ecclesia in Europa ( June
28, 2003), Bishop Bernard Fellay
sent a study to all the cardinals of
the Catholic Church on January 6,
2004, to which there has been no
reply to this day. In the third chapter
of this study, we read: “Ecumenism
generates relativism towards the
faith.” Pius XI, in Mortalium Animos,
declared in 1928 that this form of
ecumenism “reverses from top to
bottom the foundations of the Catholic faith.” In his preface, Bishop
Fellay writes: “This ecumenism
has destroyed the most beautiful
treasures of the Church, because
instead of accepting Unity founded
on the whole truth, it has wished to
build some kind of unity adapted
to a truth blended with error” (From
Ecumenism to Silent Apostasy). [Available from Angelus Press.]
(DICI No. 209)

Rome issues
a call to order
concerning
declaration of
nullity in the matter
of marriage
On January 29, Pope Benedict
XVI received the dean and judges
of the Rota for the opening of the
legal year. In his address, the Pope
insisted on the threefold orientation of the ecclesiastical tribunal’s
work: justice, charity, and truth.
“It is necessary to take note of the
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

Church an
widespread and deeply rooted,
though not always evident, tendency to place justice and charity
in opposition to one another, as if
the two were mutually exclusive.”
He explained that in this regard,
some maintain that pastoral charity
is a sufficient justification to declare
the nullity of a marriage, and that
truth itself tends to be viewed as
something one can adapt to make
fit the requirements of a given case.
Speaking to his guests, the Holy
Father continued: “Your ministry
is essentially a work of justice: a
virtue whose human and Christian
value it is more important than
ever to rediscover, even within the
Church.” For this reason Canon
Law “must always be considered
in its essential relationship with
justice, recognizing that the goal
of juridical activity is the salvation
of souls.” The Sovereign Pontiff
stressed that its practice “must be
characterized by the high practice
of human and Christian virtues,
particularly prudence and justice,
but also fortitude,” which becomes
more important when the parties
in question or the prevailing social
expectations can most easily be
accommodated by an unjust solution. The lawyers in particular
“must not only pay full attention
to the truth of the evidence,” but
also carefully avoid taking on cases
that, in conscience, have no merit.
The Pope further declared: “One
must avoid pseudo-pastoral claims
that would situate questions on a
purely horizontal plane, in which
what matters is to satisfy subjective
expectations in order to arrive at a
declaration of nullity at any cost, so
that the parties may be able to overcome obstacles to receiving the sacrament of Penance and Holy Communion.” Benedict XVI continued
by pointing out that neglect of principles results in a “false good,”
and that one thereby “facilitates

a return to the sacraments that is
incompatible with the truth of one’s
personal situation.” Indeed, justice
and truth both imply love of truth
and the seeking of truth. “Without truth, charity degenerates into
sentimentality, and love becomes
an empty shell, to be filled in an
arbitrary way.” In a culture without truth, this is the danger facing
love. Benedict XVI reminded his
audience that the indissolubility
of Catholic marriage ensures its
unity and stability by virtue of the
sacrament itself, and thus, when in
doubt, the marriage must be considered valid until proven otherwise.
One runs the serious risk otherwise
of “transforming every conjugal difficulty into a symptom of a failed
union whose essential nucleus of
justice–the indissoluble bond–is
thus effectively denied.”
(DICI No. 209)

Beatification
of Pope Pius
XII provokes
controversy
O n D e c e m b e r 19 , Po p e
Benedict XVI authorized the Congregation for the Causes of the
Saints to promulgate the decree
acknowledging the “heroic virtues”
of two of his predecessors, Pius XII
(1939-58) and John Paul II (19782005). He also recognized the “martyrdom” of the Polish priest Jerzy
Popieluszko (1947-84), chaplain of
the Solidarnosc trade union, who
was abducted by three officers of
the Communist political police (SB)
near Wloclawek, north of Warsaw.
His abductors tortured him to death
before tying him up and throwing
him into the waters of the Vistula.
The publication of the decree
acknowledging the heroic virtues
of Pius XII surprised more than

and World
one observer. Rome had begun
the beatification process of Pius
XII in October 1967. On May 8,
2007, the majority of the members of the Congregation for the
Causes of the Saints recognized the
“heroic virtues” of Eugenio Pacelli.
The file was then to be submitted
to Benedict XVI for the purpose
of signing the decree declaring
him “venerable.” However, a few
months later, the Pope decided to
create a special commission within
the Secretariat of State to study
the file of the beatification process.
Last June the postulator for the
cause of the Pope of the Second
World War confided to the press
that the German Pope preferred not
to sign the decree of beatification
of his predecessor lest the relations
between Jews and Catholics be
“compromised.” The director of the
Holy See Press Office immediately
requested that Benedict XVI be
“left completely free in his evaluations and decisions.”
Several prominent Jews immediately reacted to the proclamation of the heroic virtues of Pope
Pius XII. On December 20, Gilles
Bernheim, the Chief Rabbi of
France, expressed his hopes that
the Catholic Church would forsake
the beatification process of Pius
XII. According to him Pope Benedict’s decision is “diametrically
opposed to dialogue between Jews
and Christians.” “For over 40 years
the beatification process of Pius
XII introduced by John XXIII and
Paul VI has never failed to cause
controversy and disappointment
concerning what he symbolizes.
Today the question as to whether
or not the project will be brought to
completion has become the symbol
of what Benedict XVI will do with
his pontificate,” he added.
Even more adamant was the
reaction of the Secretary General
of the Central Council of the Jews

35

Pope Pius XII

of Germany. Stephan Kramer
described himself as “furious” and
“sad” that the Pope had declared
“venerable” his predecessor Pius
XII, who has been criticized for his
silence during the Holocaust: “This
is clearly a misrepresentation of
historical facts concerning the Nazi
period. And Benedict XVI is rewriting history without permitting a
scholarly scientific discussion of
Pius XII’s attitude towards Nazism.
That is what infuriates me,” he
declared to the AFP.
Rabbi David Rosen, counselor
to the chief rabbi of Jerusalem
in matters of dialogue and delegate for dialogue with the Vatican, expressed his reserves in the
December 20th issue of Corriere
della Sera. Pope Benedict XVI’s
decision “…does not show much
sensitivity towards the concerns of
the Jewish community,” he stated,
hoping the Pope Pacelli project will
not go forward.
For its part, the Jewish community of Italy “remains critical”
of Pope Benedict XVI’s decision.
In a joint declaration, Riccardo Di
Segni, chief rabbi of Rome, Renzo
Gattegna, President of the Union
of Jewish Italian Communities, and
Riccardo Pacifici, President of the
Jewish Community of Rome, stated:
“We cannot in any way whatsoever

meddle in the internal decisions
of the Church.” “However, if this
decision implied a definitive and
unilateral judgment of the historical work of Pius XII, we repeat that
our evaluation remains critical,”
they said.
On December 20, Monsignor
Angelo Amato, prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of the
Saints, granted an interview to
Avvenire, the daily newspaper of
the Italian Episcopal Conference.
When asked whether the simultaneous declaration of the “heroic
virtues” of both Pontiffs meant
that their causes would henceforth
go forward together, Monsignor
Amato replied, “Each one will
follow its own course.”
The Roman prelate explained
that the recognition of the “heroic
virtues” of Pius XII could “not
be considered surprising” for his
dicastery. In December 2007 the
Pope had decided to create a special
commission within the Secretariat
of State to study the file of the
beatifi cation process and consult
the archives of the Holy See. This
“inquiry,” according to the prelate,
reached a “positive” conclusion.
Four days after Pope Benedict
authorized the Congregation for the
Causes of the Saints to acknowledge
the heroic virtues of Pius XII, Fr.
Federico Lombardi, director of the
Holy See Press Office, felt obliged
to provide, in a note published
on December 23, some “explanations” concerning the beatification
process. According to him, it is not
intended as an “evaluation of the
historical importance of all the decisions” made by Eugenio Pacelli, but
rather refers to the “witness of his
Christian life”: The Pope’s signing
of the decree on the “heroic virtues”
of Pius XII has caused a certain
number of reactions in the Jewish
world, probably because its meaning is clearly understood by the
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

36

Catholic Church and experts on the
subject, though the public at large
may be in need of further explanations, and in particular for Jews,
who understandably are very sensitive, to the history of the Second
World War and the Holocaust.
“When a pope signs a decree
on the ‘heroic virtues’ of a Servant
of God…, he confirms the positive
evaluation that the Congregation
for the Causes of the Saints has
already approved. Naturally, this
evaluation takes into account the
circumstances in which he lived.
An examination from a historical
point of view is then necessary, but
the evaluation refers essentially to
the Christian life led by this person
(his intense relationship with God
and his constant efforts to attain
evangelical perfection…) and not
to the evaluation of the historical
importance of all his decisions.
“This is in no way meant to
limit the discussion of the concrete
choices made by Pius XII in the
situation in which he found himself. As far as she is concerned, the
Church states that they were made
only in order to fulfill to the best of
his ability his grave responsibilities
as pope. In any case, the attention and preoccupation of Pius XII
for the fate of the Jews–which was
certainly taken into account in the
evaluation of his virtues–have been
widely attested and acknowledged
even by many Jews.
“Historians remain free therefore in their research and conclusions in their own field. And in
the present case, we understand
the request for access to the official documents for the purpose of
research. For the complete opening
of the archives, as we have already
said several times, it will first be
necessary to organize and classify
a massive collection of documents,
which technically requires a space
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

Church an
of several more years,” remarked
Father Lombardi.
(DICI, No. 208.)
For further details: Pierre Blet, S.J.,
Pius XII and the Second World War:
According to the Archives of the Vatican
(Paulist Press, 1999).

Benedict XVI visits
the Synagogue
of Rome
The pope went to the synagogue of Rome in the afternoon of
Sunday, January 17. In his speech
before the leaders of the Italian
Jewish community, he clearly
aligned himself with his predecessor, John Paul II, recalling the latter’s visit to the Roman synagogue
on April 13, 1986, and quoting in
full his message of repentance at
the Wall of Lamentations during
the pilgrimage that he made to the
Holy Land in March 2000: “We are
deeply saddened by the behavior of
those who in the course of history
have caused these children of yours
to suffer, and asking your forgiveness we wish to commit ourselves
to genuine brotherhood with the
people of the Covenant.” Benedict
XVI placed all these overtures
towards Judaism in the framework
of the interreligious dialogue promoted by the conciliar document
Nostra Aetate (1965). He spoke of
the common duty “to strive to keep
open the space for dialogue, for
reciprocal respect, for growth in
friendship…”
This was Benedict XVI’s third
visit to a synagogue, after Cologne
in August 2005 and New York in
April 2008, which prompted JeanMarie Guenois to write in Le Figaro
of January 18: “No other pope has
visited as many synagogues.” Moreover, in May 2009, during his trip

to the Holy Land, the pope went to
Jerusalem, in the footsteps of John
Paul II, to visit the Yad Vashem
Shoah Memorial and the Wall of
Lamentations. On this occasion, he
also visited the Chief Rabbinate of
Jerusalem.
In response to questions posed
by the Roman agency I.Media,
the chief rabbi of Rome, Riccardo
Di Segni, the principal organizer
of this visit, declared: “I expect a
serious commitment from the pope
to make progress in respect by
trying to appreciate the positions
and feelings of others. I expect him
to commit himself to the continuation of dialogue.” He added:
“If Ratzinger the theologian
has a complicated theology, there
is room in this theology for a profound respect for the Jewish roots
of Christianity. This is not common,
especially in the modern thought
of the Churches in general. On this
point, Ratzinger is very open to discussion with Jewish tradition, both
ancient and recent. His theology
regarding the Jews unfortunately
includes a few questionable points
such as the questions of salvation,
truth, conversion or fulfillment.
These are problems that cannot fill
us with enthusiasm.”
In fact, during the speech at the
synagogue, Benedict XVI did not
touch upon any of these “questionable points,” wishing, as he had
declared during Sunday’s Angelus,
only to show “the common commitment to recognize what unites”
the two communities: “faith in the
one God, first of all, but also the
safeguard of life and of the family,
and the aspiration to social justice
and peace.”
On January 13, Cardinal Walter
Kasper, president of the Pontifical
Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, announced
during a press conference what
appeared in the papal allocution of

and World

37

Priest Expelled by Bishop for Traditional Attitude

B
Bishop Christian Nourrichard

Fr. Francis Michel

the 17th, namely, the importance in
the pope’s eyes of giving to a secularized world the witness of a “faith
shared” by the Jews and Christians
“in one God [and] in the Decalogue.” See our commentary below.
As Frederic Mounier observed
in La Croix of January 18:
Riccardo Pacifici, president of
the Jewish community of Rome,
was the only one to bring up the
name of Pius XII, whom Benedict
XVI did not name, and to ask for
the opening of the archives [of the
Vatican on the Second World War—
Ed.]: “The silence of Pius XII before
the Shoah, still hurts because something should have been said. Maybe
it would not have stopped the death
trains, but it would have sent a
signal, a word of extreme comfort, of human solidarity, toward
those brothers of ours transported
to Auschwitz.” Shortly before, he
had praised the nuns who saved so
many Jews.
In reply, the pope remarked
in passing that “the Apostolic See
itself provided assistance, often in
a hidden and discreet way” to save
Jews during the war.

ishop Christian Nourrichard, the modernist bishop of Evreux, France,
dismissed as pastor of the church of Saint-Taurin (Thiberville), Fr. Francis
Michel. Fr. Michel runs his parish in a traditional style, which seems to be
disliked by the bishop.
The attitude of the bishop provoked a reaction from the faithful. On January 3,
the archbishop appeared in the church, wearing rainbow vestments, next to the
new recently appointed pastor at the inauguration of the parish, and had to leave
because of the booing of parishioners.
Fr. Michel was apparently “too conservative”–and worse–he was successful and
well-loved in a big parish. The bishop tried to put an end to those “old-fashioned”
activities. It is interesting that this caused a major scandal. The story was spread on
the Internet, with a video of the bishop’s speech. The major of the place declared
in a video on the Internet that he did not agree with the decision of the bishop.
For once the revolution worked in favor of Tradition!
It seems, however, that the bishop changed his mind after visiting the Apostolic
Nuncio, Archbishop Luigi Ventura, recently appointed by Pope Benedict XVI.
Fr. Michel was reinstated.
(Angelus Press)

This visit had a highly symbolic
political significance, which the
Jewish authorities who organized it
did not fail to mention. Therefore
it is not surprising that diplomacy
alone could enter the synagogue,
leaving theology at the door.
(DICI, Jan. 18, 2010.)

Commentary

In his speech at the synagogue,
Benedict XVI emphasized what,
according to him, unites Judaism
and Catholicism, and, following
John Paul II, invited Catholics to [a
commitment] to “genuine brotherhood with the people of the Covenant” and asserted that “Christians
and Jews share to a great extent a
common spiritual patrimony, they
pray to the same Lord, they have
the same roots, and yet they often
remain unknown to each other.”
To be sure, this speech is in
perfect continuity with the Second
Vatican Council’s Declaration
Nostra Aetate, but scarcely with the
teaching of the first pope. In effect,
standing before the people of Israel,
St. Peter expressed himself in these
terms:

“You are the heirs of the prophets, and of the covenant which God
made with our fathers, when he said
to Abraham, Every race on earth
shall receive a blessing through thy
posterity. It is to you first of all that
God has sent his Son, whom he
raised up from the dead to bring
you a blessing, to turn away every
one of you from his sins” (Acts 3:2526 [Knox version]).
But, he added, addressing
the princes of the people and the
elders: “This is ‘the stone which
was rejected by you the builders,
which is become the head of the
corner.’ Neither is there salvation
in any other. For there is no other
name under heaven given to men,
whereby we must be saved.” (Acts
4:11-12).
And St. Paul added: “Be it
known therefore to you, men, brethren, that through him forgiveness of
sins is preached to you: and from
all the things from which you could
not be justified by the law of Moses.
In him every one that believeth is
justified.” (Acts 13:38-39).
Like SS. Peter and Paul, one
cannot but desire that the salvation
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

38

brought by Jesus Christ to all men
might be announced to the Jews.
But it is inconceivable that this
salvation be announced to them by
a preaching fundamentally different from that of the Apostles who
are the two pillars of the Catholic
Church.
For further study, see “Christians, Muslims, Jews: Do We All
Have the Same God?” by Fr. François Knittel, Christendom, No. 14,
Nov.–Dec. 2007, in the archives
online at DICI.org/en.

The World:
Christians
Martyred in 2009
On January 23, Bishop Vitus
Huonder spoke about Christians
who died in 2009 for their faith. He
observed that if the Church was in
need more or less everywhere in
the world, even Switzerland was
not spared this harsh reality, though
in its case it was more a matter of
moral need. During the intercessory prayers, the 27 Christians put
to death for their faith last year
were listed. Underscoring that “the
blood of martyrs is the seed of new
Christians,” the names of the 27
victims were inscribed on four large
candles placed on the altar. Among
them one might read notably the
names of Fr. Bernard Digal, from
the Indian state of Orissa, killed by
Hindu extremists last August 25;
Ciza Deo, 57 years old and father
of six children, killed last December 15 in the Democratic Republic
of the Congo; and the 11-year-old
Pakistani Christian, Irfan Masih,
murdered near Karachi last April
22 when Muslim fanatics attacked
the Christian district.
In a report published December 30, 2009, the missionary news
agency Fides, an organ of the Congregation for the Evangelization of
THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

Church an
Society of St. Pius X’s
US District to host its
first annual conference
The Society of St. Pius X’s United
States District will host its first annual
conference this fall on the occasion of
the 40th anniversary of the Society’s
founding. It will be held in Kansas City
from October 15-17. Bishop Fellay
will be the keynote speaker; additional
speakers will be announced soon.
Further details will appear in future
months.

Peoples, indicates that, according
to its information, 30 priests, 2
religious sisters, 2 seminarians, and
3 lay volunteers “lost their lives in
a violent manner in the course of
2009.” The Vatican’s missionary
news agency pointed out that this
figure was “the highest number
in the last ten years,” and “nearly
double the number reported in the
preceding year.” The majority of
the religious and lay persons were
killed on the American continents:
18 priests, 2 seminarians, 1 sister,
and 2 laymen met their deaths in
Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Cuba,
El Salvador, the United States, Guatemala, and Honduras. Africa followed, with 9 priests, 1 sister, and
1 layman killed in four different
countries: the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Africa,
Kenya, and Burundi. Two priests
were killed in Asia in 2009, one in
India and the other in the Philippines. And finally, one priest was
killed in Europe: the Frenchman
Louis Jousseaume.
Thus 37 priests, religious, and
laymen of the Catholic Church lost
their lives by violence during the
course of 2009. There were 20 such
deaths in 2008, 21 in 2007, 24 in
2006, 25 in 2005, 16 in 2004, 29 in
2003, 25 in 2002, 33 in 2001, and

31 in the year 2000. So in ten years,
from 2000 to 2009, there were 261
Catholics murdered throughout the
world, among them 190 priests and
4 bishops.
(DICI, No. 209)

Italy: The Chief
Rabbi of Rome’s
ultimatum:
“Them or us”
“If peace with the Lefebvrists
means renouncing the overtures
made by the Council, the Church
will have to decide: them or us!”
declared the chief rabbi of Rome,
Riccardo Di Segni, on January 26,
a few days after Benedict XVI’s visit
to the Synagogue of Rome and on
the eve of the Day of Remembrance
dedicated to the victims of the Holocaust. Questioned by the online
Italian Catholic monthly Il Consulente Re, Riccardo Di Segni added
moreover that describing the Jews
as “elder brothers” (as John Paul
II did during his visit to the Synagogue of Rome in 1986), was “very
ambiguous from a theological point
of view, because the elder brothers
in the Bible are the villains.” In the
eyes of the chief rabbi, speaking of
“elder brothers” means: “You once
were, but now you do not count
at all!” Lastly, Riccardo Di Segni
opined that the Sant’Egidio Community (a lay movement founded at
Rome in 1968 and the originator of
interreligious meetings like the one
held at Assisi in 1986) was “a fine
example of collaboration” between
Jews and Catholics.
(DICI, No. 209)

and World
Germany: Bishop
Williamson will be
tried on April 16
A spokesman of the court of
Ratisbonne announced on January
27 that Bishop Richard Williamson will be tried on April 16, 2010,
in Germany. According to France
Presse, an official demand for his
appearance has been sent to the British bishop’s residence in London.
The proceedings brought
against Bishop Williamson are for
“incitement of racial hatred,” after
the words he spoke in Ratisbonne
about the Holocaust and which
were broadcasted on the Swedish
television channel SVT on January
21, 2009. The bishop disputed the
charges made against him and did
not follow the simplified procedure
which would have enabled the case
to come to a close after paying a
fine of 12,000 Euros. The spokesman also specified on November
9, 2009, that the bishop was not
required to be physically present
at his trial, and that he could be
represented by another.
(DICI No. 209.)

The Vatican: The
second theological
meeting between
the Roman experts
and the SSPX held
on January 18
The second theological meeting between Rome’s theologians
and those of the SSPX was held
on January 18 at the Vatican in the
offices of the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith. The two parties, one of the participants told I.
Media News, “have begun studying
in depth the themes on the agenda

for the doctrinal discussions.” No
press release was issued on the
occasion of the latest working session, as there had been for the
preceding session, which was held
on October 26, 2009. The next
meeting will take place during the
second half of the month of March,
I. Media was also told.
During the sermon he gave
during the priestly ordinations at
the Seminary of La Reja in Argentina last December 19, Bishop
Alfonso de Galarreta, who heads
the Society of St. Pius X’s delegation, listed the subjects to be discussed in the forthcoming meetings: “all the themes we have been
critiquing for forty years, especially
religious liberty, the modern liberties, freedom of conscience, the
dignity of the human person–as
they say–the rights of man, personalism, ecumenism, interreligious
dialogue, inculturation, collegiality–the egalitarianism, democratism, and destruction of authority
that have been introduced into the
Church; as well as all the notions
of ecclesiology which have totally
changed what the Church is: the
question of the “self-consciousness”
of the Church, the Church as communion, the Church as sacrament,
the Church as the People of God;
and all these new ideas about the
relation between the Church and
the world. Then there is the question of the Mass, the new Mass, the
new missal, the liturgical reform…,
and still other themes.” (See the
March 2010 issue of The Angelus.)
While receiving in audience the
members of the Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith last January 15, Benedict XVI justified the
gesture made towards the Society of
St. Pius X, and expressed his desire
to see “the remaining doctrinal
problems overcome” thanks to the
work of the Congregation.
(DICI No. 209.)

39

Spain: Saint James
Holy Year 2010
The year 2010 is a St. James
jubilee year because the 25th of
July, the saint’s feast day, falls on a
Sunday, and, in memory of the finding of the Apostle’s tomb, which
occurred on a Sunday, the year is
declared a St. James Holy Year.

Statue of St. James

The Society of St. Pius X is
organizing a big pilgrimage for July
3–August 6, 2010, from Domezain
(Pyrénées-Atlantiques) to the sanctuary of Santiago de Compostela
along the camino frances. The pilgrims will traverse 520 miles in
four and a half weeks of walking,
following a trail marked out by
yellow arrows on the ground, walls,
or posts. Everyone will be able to go
at his own pace each of the thirty
or so stages, with all the pilgrims
regrouping every afternoon to hear
Mass.
For Information and registration: Pèlerinages de Tradition, 23
rue Poliveau, 75005 Paris; Telephone: (01) 55.43.15.60; e-mail:
pele.trad@wanadoo.fr; on the Web:
http://pelerinagesdetradition.com.
(DICI No. 209.)
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

40

Can parents claim a religious
exemption against vaccinations for
their children?

The decision as to whether or not to accept
vaccinations for one’s children is a very delicate
and complex one. Many different factors enter into
the decision, and since these factors differ greatly
from one vaccine to another and from one family
and one individual to another, there can be no
one standard answer to the vaccination question.
The essential consideration is the proportion
between the risk of complications from the vaccine
and the potential benefit to be gained both by
the individual and by society as a whole. This
proportion is not easy to evaluate, since there are
many well-documented, medically acknowledged
complications (such as fever, seizures, neurological
complications), and then there are the other
difficulties that might not be scientifically proven
to be a consequence of any particular vaccine,
but for which many believe that there is a good
index of suspicion, such as compromising of the
natural immunity to infectious disease, and other
ill-defined but real problems that have often been
linked to vaccinations, such as learning disabilities
and autism. All this has to be balanced against
the frequency and gravity of the infectious disease
against which the parents desire to protect their
children.
In principle the evaluation of this proportion is
a medical consideration and not a religious one, and
the exemption from vaccinations that people request
is on medical grounds, because they consider that
the dangers outweigh the potential gain. It would
not be right to claim a religious exemption for a
decision of this nature. This is the false attitude of
those religious sects that refuse to acknowledge the
real value of modern medical science. Indeed, it is
not the function of the Church to determine which
vaccinations are proportionate, and which are not,
and whether vaccinations have a negative impact on
the immune system or are responsible for autism or
other such disorders.
However, involved in this whole question of
vaccination, there is a principle of natural law,
namely that parents have the responsibility and
consequently the right to make these kinds of
decisions for their children. It is only indirectly,
then, inasmuch as the Church defends this right
of parents enshrined in the natural law, that this
question could be considered a religious one, and
religious exemption could be claimed.

THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

F R .

p e t e r

R

QUESTIONS AN
This principle of natural law is clearly stated in
the 1917 Code of Canon Law:
Parents are under a grave obligation to see to the
religious and moral education of their children, as well
as to their physical and civic training, as far as they can,
and moreover to provide for their temporal well being.
(Canon 1113)

Note that parents’ rights are not limited to the area
of education, but include every aspect of life. If the
Church defends parents’ rights over those of the
State in the area of education in particular, since
these are the rights that modern secularists attack
most vehemently, the same principles apply also to
issues of health, such as vaccinations.
It was in his encyclical on the Christian
Education of Youth (1929) that Pope Pius XI,
quoting St. Thomas Aquinas, explained the basis of
this inviolable right of the family:
The child is naturally something of the father…so by
natural right the child, before reaching the use of reason,
is under the father’s care. Hence it would be contrary
to natural justice if the child, before the use of reason,
were removed from the care of its parents, or if any
disposition were made concerning him against the will
of the parents. (Divini Illius Magistri, Angelus Press, p. 20)

The Pope comments on this, pointing out that
“this duty on the part of the parents continues up to
the time when the child is in a position to provide
for itself,” applying this to the inviolable right of
parental education. However, the same argument
can be applied to all health-related issues, as Canon
1113 explicitly states.
In the same encyclical, Pope Pius XI answers the
revolutionary objections of those who would want
to overturn the natural law, making the child belong
primarily to the State, and consequently giving the
State responsibility in all such matters, over and
above the parents:
On this point the common sense of mankind is in
such complete accord, that they would be in open
contradiction with it who dared maintain that the
children belong to the State before they belong to the
family, and that the State has an absolute right over
their education. Untenable is the reason they adduce,
namely that a man is born a citizen and hence belongs
primarily to the State, not bearing in mind that before
being a citizen man must exist; and existence does not
come from the State, but from the parents, as Leo XIII
wisely declared: “The children are something of the
father, and as it were an extension of the person of the
father; and, to be perfectly accurate, they enter into and
become part of civil society, not directly by themselves,
but through the family in which there were born…and
therefore the father’s power is of such a nature that it

Q

A

e r

R .

s c o t t

41

AND ANSWERS
cannot be destroyed or absorbed by the State, for it has
the same origin as human life itself. (Rerum Novarum)

Inasmuch as the Church defends with insistence
the natural right of the family in the question of
vaccinations, as all other issues necessary for the
temporal well-being of children, a right that modern
society tends to deny, it is certainly possible and
at times prudent to claim a religious exemption
from vaccinations. However, it must be understood
that it is not up to the Church any more than to
the State to determine which vaccinations ought
to be given and which ought not. All that the
Church can do is to condemn those vaccinations in
which immorality is involved. This could be in the
production of the vaccine, as in the case of those
derived from aborted fetal cell lines, or in the life
style that the vaccine encourages, such as the HPV
vaccine, effective for only five years, when given
to pre-teen girls to protect against venereal disease
and the higher incidence of cervical cancer that is
its consequence.

Q

Should we recite the luminous
mysteries of the rosary?

It was in his Apostolic Letter Rosarium Virginis
Mariae of October 16, 2002, that Pope John Paul
II attempted to modify the rosary, amongst other
things by adding in five additional mysteries, called
the mysteries of light to distinguish them from the
joyful, sorrowful, and glorious mysteries.
Unfortunately, this letter, which pretends
to promote the rosary, is tainted by naturalism
throughout, and considers the rosary as a
psychological experience similar to the prayers and
meditations of non-Catholic religions. Hence the
importance of the “anthropological significance of
the rosary” (§25), making understood the mystery
of man. Amongst the “improvements” to the rosary
proposed in this vein is the addition of the mysteries
of light, especially chosen so as not to give offense
to Protestants, namely all fully described in the
Gospels and none of them explicitly mentioning
the Blessed Virgin Mary. This is in line with the
pope’s avowed intention of making the rosary more
“Christocentric,” which means in practice that it
becomes less explicitly Marian.
The five “significant,” “luminous,” “moments”
(§21) that he chooses are Christ’s baptism in the
Jordan river, His self-manifestation at Cana,
His proclamation of the Kingdom of God and
call to conversion, His Transfiguration, and the
institution of the Blessed Eucharist. They are all
beautiful events taken from the Gospels, and much

A

appreciated as manifestations of Jesus’s goodness,
in which He shows Himself, His power, His mercy,
or His kingdom. However, it is very interesting to
note that none of them has a direct rapport with the
mystery of the Redemption, the institution of the
Holy Eucharist alone having an indirect relationship
inasmuch as it is the foundation of its unbloody
renewal. The introduction of these mysteries is,
then, an effort to water down the traditional focus
on the essential mysteries of the Redemption, as
contained in the joyful, sorrowful, and glorious
mysteries.
However, it is no accident that the traditional
mysteries of the rosary are entirely focused on the
mystery of the Redemption, prepared in the joyful
mysteries, accomplished in the sorrowful mysteries,
and applied in the glorious mysteries. If Tradition
has handed them down to us in this manner, it is
because these are the mysteries that our souls need
to meditate on for eternal salvation. In one of his
yearly encyclicals on the rosary, Pope Leo XIII
explains this:
The Rosary offers an easy way to penetrate the chief
mysteries of the Christian religion and to impress them
on the mind.…in an orderly pattern the chief mysteries
of our religion follow one another.…First come the
mysteries in which the Word was made flesh and Mary,
the inviolate Virgin and Mother, performed her maternal
duties for him with a holy joy; then come the sorrows,
the agony and death of the suffering Christ, the price
at which the salvation of our race was accomplished;
finally follow the mysteries full of his glory. (Magnae Dei
Matris, Sept. 8, 1892)

The reason for this change of orientation
is to turn attention little by little away from the
Redemption as a purchasing of the souls of sinners,
buying us back from our sins by making satisfaction
for the offense given to God. The modern theology
of the Paschal Mystery thinks that this is not
necessary, that God is not so childish as to require
payment for sins, and that consequently all we need
to reflect on is the manifestation of God’s love or
glory or kindness, for “each of these mysteries is a
revelation of the Kingdom now present in the very
person of Jesus” (Rosarium Virginis Mariae, §21).
The end result of the recitation of these
luminous mysteries will be a dessication of the
rosary, its losing its specifically Marian focus,
turning one’s attention away from the union with
Christ’s act of Redemption by which alone we
can be saved from our sins. Little by little it will
become empty and sterile and will not be prayed.
Consequently, we ought to refuse this optional
“improvement,” but rather stick to the hard and
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

42

tried Tradition of the Church that has sanctified
so many generations of saints. Although it is not
in itself a sin to recite these mysteries of light with
modern Catholics, we certainly ought to discourage
their recitation, and avoid purchasing or making
available any pamphlets or booklets that present the
mysteries of light.

Is capitalism to be condemned to the
same extent as communism?

It is certainly true that the Church condemns
both laissez-faire capitalism and communism,
neither political system being according to Catholic
principles. However, there is a profound difference,
the former not being opposed to the natural law as
is the latter, which was condemned as “intrinsically
perverse” by Pope Pius XI in his 1937 encyclical on
communism, Divini Redemptoris.
It was, in fact, before the publication of
Marx’s Communist Manifesto, in his first encyclical,
Qui Pluribus (1846), that Pope Pius IX identified
and condemned the fundamental perversion
of communism: “the unspeakable doctrine of
Communism, as it is called, a doctrine most opposed
to the very natural law. For if this doctrine were
accepted, the complete destruction of everyone’s
laws, government, property, and even of human
society itself would follow” (§16). Archbishop
Lefebvre comments:
It could not be better expressed. What is left of
the rights of men in the countries where Communist
governments have been established? There is no more
property, it has been replaced by Collectivism. As for
human society, it has been replaced by slavery. (Against
the Heresies, p. 51)

Pope Leo XIII in his magisterial encyclical on
the condition of the working classes, Rerum Novarum,
condemned both excesses. However, not in the
same way. After defending the right of ownership of
private property as the foundation of human society,
he has this to say of socialism:
The fundamental principle of Socialism which would
make all possessions public property is to be utterly
rejected because it injures the very ones whom it seeks
to help, contravenes the natural rights of individual
persons, and throws the functions of the State and public
peace into confusion. (§23)

He goes on to condemn the implacable class warfare
engineered by communism as “abhorrent to reason
and truth.”

THE ANGELUS • April 2010 www.angeluspress.org

QUESTIONS AN
When it comes to capitalism, it is not the system
of private ownership and profit that he condemns,
nor the inequalities that exist among men:
There are truly very great and very many natural
differences among men. Neither the talents, nor the skill,
nor the health, nor the capacities of all are the same,
and unequal fortune follows of itself upon necessary
inequality in respect to these endowments. And clearly
this condition of things is adapted to benefit both
individuals and the community… (§26).

To the contrary, it is not capitalism itself but rather
the abuse of private ownership, so characteristic of
modern-day capitalism, that the Church condemns.
Pope Leo XIII lists some abuses, such as treating
workers as slaves, or refusing to pay them a just,
living, and family wage:
It is shameful and inhuman, however, to use men as
things for gain and to put no more value on them than
what they are worth in muscle and energy….To defraud
anyone of the wage due him is a great crime that calls
down avenging wrath from Heaven. (§§31, 32)

He goes on to teach that the collaboration
between workers and employers must go beyond
simple questions of justice to a relationship
of friendship, not bound by materialism, but
considering that earthly gain of transitory things is
but a preparation for eternity.
It follows from these considerations that
capitalism is not condemned by the Church as
intrinsically perverse, as is communism. It is a
system of government and economy in which a
man’s religious and natural rights can be preserved,
even if this is not always the case in practice. The
right to private ownership guarantees, at least
to some extent, a man’s right to raise his family
according to the natural and divine law, to support
the Church, to practice the true religion, to educate
his children, to profess the Faith, all of which
rights are denied by the collectivism practiced by
communism. If it is true that socialist tendencies
penetrating more and more into our modern
societies undermine these rights progressively,
this is not in itself the consequence of capitalism.
Consequently, the Church can use, and even
“baptize,” the capitalist system in a way that it
cannot do for communism. An industrialist, a
businessman, a property developer can all be good
Catholics, provided that they observe the principles
of justice and charity contained in the natural law. It
would consequently be wrong to consider capitalism
as inherently unjust, or consider that the state has
the right to intervene and distribute wealth equally
amongst all the citizens.

43

AND ANSWERS
However, this being said, it must be
remembered that modern, liberal capitalism cannot
be accepted as such. It does have to be baptized.
It is penetrated by gross materialism; unjust and
disordered motives of pure profit; a refusal to
consider the primacy of the common good; and by
the principle of man’s economic, moral, and social
independence that is so characteristic of liberalism
and that has destroyed the Catholic spirit ever since
the Protestant revolution.
If Pope Pius IX points out that communism is
the fruit of Freemasonry, Archbishop Lefebvre also
explains the obvious–namely, that the opposing vice
of capitalism is also the outcome of Freemasonry,
and that they share a similar liberalism and
materialism, although in different degrees and
different ways:
With the capitalist economic system, which is the fruit
of the French Revolution, the same people distilled the
poison of this so-called freedom, because behind it–as
the Pope says–were the secret societies. It was they
who broke with every social structure that existed to
protect the workers: the corporations, the guilds….All
was broken at the time of the Revolution. The worker
then found himself standing alone face to face with his
employers; and at the same time unrestricted freedom
was granted: “liberal” economy, freedom of trade,
freedom of industry, etc. Clearly those who possessed
money profited from the situation to accumulate
immense fortunes at the expense of the workers, who
found themselves defenseless….All these sufferings and
injustices are the fruit of the modern errors…that had
been propagated initially by the Protestants, and then by
the Revolution: the liberal spirit, that gave total freedom
to trade and industry, whereas before there had been
rules. (Against the Heresies, pp. 317-18)

Let us not, then, be deceived either by
collectivist or by capitalist propaganda. It is only by
a profoundly supernatural spirit that we can begin
to rebuild a Catholic social fabric. For it is not by
redistribution but only by grace that the diabolical
vice of liberalism can be rooted out of our souls, and
that a private and unequal but just sharing in the
goods of this world can prepare our souls, and our
children’s souls, for eternity.
Fr. Peter Scott was ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988. After assignments as seminary professor, US District Superior, and Rector of Holy Cross
Seminary in Goulburn, Australia, he is presently Headmaster of Our Lady of
Mount Carmel Academy in Wilmot, Ontario, Canada. Those wishing answers
may please send their questions to Q &A in care of Angelus Press, 2915 Forest
Ave., Kansas City, MO 64109.

THE BEST OF

QUESTIONS
AND ANSWERS
The book our readers wanted. The BEST
questions and the BEST answers of 30
years of The Angelus are printed in this
hardback edition. This will be a family’s heirloom reference book for everyday Catholic living to match the Catholic Faith we believe and the Latin Mass
we attend. Over 300 answers classified
under 30 subtitles, authored by Frs. Pulvermacher, Laisney, Doran, Boyle, and
Scott:
Marriage, Parenting, Family Life and Rearing
Children
Science and Medical Matters
Lives After Death
Catholic Citizenship
Catholic Vocabulary
Church Practices and
Customs Canon Law The Papacy and the
Church Teachings Bible and Biblical Matters
Trinity, Jesus Christ, Virgin Mary, Angels,
and Saints
Mass and the Liturgy
SSPX
and the Crisis Religious Orders and Lives

•

•
•

••

••
• •

••

•

344pp. Hardcover.
STK# 8343✱ $23.95
www.angeluspress.org

THE ANGELUS • April 2010

Newest Distributed Titles
College Apologetics

Proof of the Truth of the Catholic Faith
Fr. Anthony Alexander
The classic apologetics at the adult level. It is precisely reasoned, and carries the reader through a
series of logic gates that begins with the proof of the existence of God and follows logically through
the proof of the existence of the human soul, the necessity of religion, the reliability of the Gospels,
the claims of Christ and the proofs thereof, the reason for His coming, the nature of His Church, its
four classic identifying marks, and, finally, its infallibility as the religious Teacher of mankind.
Not only is the book's logic ironclad, it also unveils the great historical evidence for the veracity of the
Church from extant writings of some of the greatest historical figures of the first centuries after Christ.
The identity of the True Church of Jesus Christ will not be a mystery after reading this book!

248pp. Softcover. STK# 8450✱ $15.00

Preparation for Death

St. Alphonsus teaches the proper attitude toward death
St. Alphonsus Liguori
“Death viewed according to the senses terrifies and causes fear; but when viewed with the eyes
of faith it consoles and becomes desirable. It appears terrible to sinners, but lovely and precious
to the saints.”–St. Alphonsus Liguori
In this popular abridgment of his monumental Preparation for Death, St. Alphonsus teaches the
proper attitude toward death, which is one of readiness; of always having one's “debts cleared.”
He cautions against letting even one day pass without reflecting on the certainty of death, the
shortness of time, and the length of eternity.
Each chapter is a short consideration on some aspect of death, divided into three points easily
understood by people in every state of life. Each point is followed by reflections and prayers to
help one persevere in one’s efforts to lead a holy life. St. Alphonsus prefaces each chapter with
a quotation from Scripture designed to touch the heart of every reader.

146pp. Softcover. STK# 8451✱ $16.95

Imitation of the Sacred Heart of Jesus
Back in print for the first time in nearly 100 years

Rev. Peter J. Arnoudt, S.J.
“This book will lead souls to sanctity.” Full of wisdom for every type of person, and written with such
natural simplicity, some say this book is even more inspiring than The Imitation of Christ. Written in
a format in which Our Lord speaks to the reader, through the holy author, Fr. Arnoudt S.J., it “points
out the path to every virtue and perfection.”

734pp. Black leatherette. Hardcover. Pocket Size: 4¼ x 6½. STK# 8447 $33.00

www.angeluspress.org ● 1-8 00-9 6 6-73 37
Please visit our website to see our entire selection of books and music.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

Open Letter to
Confused Catholics

I Accuse the Council!

Against the Heresies

Collegiality, priesthood, marriage,
religious liberty, ecumenism
89pp. Softcover.
STK# 3072✱ $10.00

The most important encyclicals
of the last two centuries
351pp. Softcover.
STK# 6710✱ $17.00 $14.95

They Have Uncrowned Him Spiritual Journey

Pastoral Letters

Religious Liberty Questioned

The Summa of Archbishop Lefebvre

Letters to the Holy Ghost Fathers

Objections to the Declaration
on Religious Liberty

Popular study of the crisis
163pp. Softcover.
STK# 5045✱ $14.00 $11.95

✗

264pp. Softcover.
STK# 5240✱ $15.00 $11.95

✗

The Mystery of Jesus
29 meditations

176pp. Softcover.
STK# 5046✱ $13.00 $10.95

A Bishop Speaks
Writings and Addresses 1963-76
312pp. Softcover.
STK# 5067✱ $20.00 $14.95

✗

Describes a sanctity
simple yet profound

73pp. Softcover. STK# 4079✱ $8.00

148pp. Softcover.
STK# 3045✱ $2.50 $1.95

✗

✗

178pp. Softcover.
STK# 7060✱ $14.00 $11.95

✗

The Little Story
of My Long Life

Marcel Lefebvre

The Horn of the Unicorn

The definitive biography

Biography of Archbishop Lefebvre

As told by Archbishop Lefebvre

Bp. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais

Dr. David Allen White

✗

119pp. Softcover. 39 photographs.
STK# 7061✱ $11.00 $9.95

718pp. Sewn softcover with French
flaps. 54 photographs, 16 Maps and
Charts. STK# 8035✱ $37.00 $22.95

352pp. Softcover. 77 photographs.
STK# 8159✱ $20.00 $12.95

Archbishop Lefebvre
and the Vatican

Apologia Pro
Marcel Lefebvre, Vol.1

Apologia Pro
Marcel Lefebvre, Vol. 2

Apologia Pro
Marcel Lefebvre, Vol. 3

Documents and correspondence

Michael Davies’s historical defense
of Abp. Lefebvre. Covers up to 1976.

1976-1979

1979-1982

Michael Davies

393pp. Softcover.
STK# 3053✱ $17.00 $9.95

Michael Davies

461pp. STK# 3051✱ $17.00 $9.95

Rev. Fr. François Laisney, SSPX

244pp. Softcover.
STK# 6719✱ $15.00 $11.95

✗

✗

✗

✗

✗

✗

461pp. Softcover.
STK# 3040✱ $16.95

The Ceremonies of the
Roman Rite Described

Adrian Fortescue, J.B. O'Connell,
and Dom Alcuin Reid, O.S.B.
A new, revised, corrected and expanded edition of
Adrian Fortescue’s and J.B. O’Connell’s classic work.
Ceremonies covered in this manual include Pontifical, Solemn and Low Mass; Vespers; Holy Week; the
sacraments;Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament;
funerals; episcopal visitation, and more.

496pp. Hardbound with
color dust jacket.
STK# 8457 $49.95
(Quantities of 10 or more
receive a 20% discount.)

The Templars:
Knights of Christ

Regine Pernoud
For centuries, historians and novelists have portrayed
the Knights Templar as avaricious and power-hungry
villains. Who were these medieval monastic knights,
whose exploits were the stuff of legend even in their
own day? Were these elite crusaders corrupted by
their conquests, which amassed them such power
and wealth as to become the envy of kings?
Indignant at the discrepancies between the
fantasies, on which “writers on history of every kind
and hue have indulged themselves without restraint”,
and the available evidence, Régine Pernoud draws
a different portrait of these Christian warriors. From
their origins as defenders of pilgrims to the Holy
Land to their dramatic finish as heretics burned at the stake, Pernoud offers a concise
but thorough account of the Templars’ contribution to Christendom.
“From Walter Scott’s Ivanhoe to Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code, the portrayal of
the Templars is as false as it is absurd. This distortion exasperated, and even enraged,
the noted French historian Régine Peroud, who has already set right many of our
misapprehensions about the Middle Ages. Now in The Templars she rehabilitates the
devout Catholic knights, exposing ‘the incredible crop of fanciful allegations attributing
to the Templars every kind of esoteric rite and belief, from the most ancient to the most
vulgar....” As she rightly points out, the truth is accessible in archives and libraries: it is
not impossible to uncover the facts. The result is an excellent, unadorned history that is
a pleasure to read.”—Piers Paul Read (author of, The Templars: The Dramatic History)

157pp. Softcover. STK# 8456 $14.95

SHIPPING & HANDLING

5-10 days

2-4 days

USA

For eign

Up to $50.00
$50.01 to $100.00
Over $100.00

$4.00
$6.00
FREE

25% of
subtotal

Up to $50.00
$50.01 to $100.00
Over $100.00

$8.00
$10.00
$8.00

FLAT FEE!

($10.00 minimum)

48 Contiguous
States only.
UPS cannot
ship to
PO Boxes.

angelus Press
2915 Forest Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 64109

www.angeluspress.org ● 1-8 00-9 6 6-73 37
Please visit our website to see our entire selection of books and music.