$4.45 SEPTEMBER 2010 “Instaurare omnia in Christo” A JOURNAL OF ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION INSIDE “CRITICISM FROM ROME ON VATICAN II” by Msgr. Brunero Gherardini The “Spirit of Vatican II”: Brian Moore’s Catholics Archbishop Lefebvre and the Authority of Vatican II Questionable Practices of the CCHD (Catholic Campaign for Human Development) The Pirates’ Prisoner CONCLUSION ANGLICANORUM COETIBUS INTERVIEW Fr. Arnaud Rostand 2010 Conference The Defense of Tr adition as tr ansmitted by archbishop Lefebvre From October 15-17, 2010, Angelus Press will host a conference on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the Society of St. Pius X’s founding on November 1, 1970. The conference will be held at the Hilton Kansas City Airport. Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X, will be the keynote speaker. The deadline is drawing near! Reserve your place before Sept. 25! Go to www.angeluspress.org/conference or request an information pamphlet. FRIDAY SATURDAY October 15 SUNDAY October 16 October 17 Registration 4:00 PM Holy Mass at the Hilton Hotel 7:00 AM The 40th Anniversary of the Society of St. Pius X 6:00 PM Mass will be celebrated inside the conference room. Breakfast is not included in our packages, but a restaurant is located within the Hilton Hotel. Fr. Arnaud Rostand The conference will commence at the Hilton Hotel. This A Bishop Speaks at the Council 9:00 AM year we celebrate the 40th Anniversary of the founding of Mr. John Vennari the Society of St. Pius X by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The Archbishop’s role at the Second Vatican Council, Children ages 4-11 cannot be admitted into the from the Preparatory Commission to his interventions conference room, but they may use the playroom which on the Council floor. will be monitored by babysitters. The Holy Mass, Heart of the Church The Popes in the Life of Archbishop Lefebvre 10:00 AM Pontifical High Mass at St. Vincent’s in Kansas City 8:00 AM A shuttle will be available for transporting our guests to St. Vincent de Paul Church in Kansas City. Brunch at St. Vincent’s After High Mass St. Vincent’s parish will host a brunch after the Pontifical High Mass. This meal is included with the Deluxe and Standard Packages. This meal can also be reserved in advance by calling St. Vincent’s Priory. Shuttle leaves for Hilton Hotel 1:00 PM 7:00 PM Fr. Kenneth Novak Fr. Juan-Carlos Iscara The role of the Holy Sacrifice in the Archbishop’s life, A look at the Archbishop’s life from the perspective of his reasons for upholding it, and the gratitude each must the Roman Pontiffs during his lifetime, from Pius XI have for his struggle. and Quas Primas to John Paul II and the scandal at Assisi. Archbishop Lefebvre and the Salvation of Religious Life Buffet and Introductions Education of the Youth: The Future of the Church 8:00 PM I Accuse the Council 11:20 AM Fr. Scott Gardner This buffet is provided for all the guests who have The doctrinal problems of Vatican II and the Archbishop’s purchased the Deluxe or Standard Packages. objections. 2:00 PM Fr. Cyprian, OSB The religious vocation of the Archbishop and the role of the contemplative life in the restoration of the Church. 3:00 PM Lunch 12:30 PM Fr. Michael McMahon The Archbishop’s educational initiatives in Africa and the SSPX. 40 Years of Fidelity, Part I 2:00 PM Conclusion Bishop Bernard Fellay 40 Years of Fidelity, Part II 4:00 PM Bishop Bernard Fellay Dinner with Bishop Fellay 6:00 PM A formal dinner will be served in the Shawnee dining room for all guests who have purchased the Deluxe and Standard Packages. This meal can also be reserved separately with the Mini Package. This dinner has limited capacity. Celebrating 40 Years of SSPX History 4:00 PM Summary of the 3-day event. Announcement for the 2011 Angelus Press Conference with next year’s date and theme. Dinner Dr. Andrew Childs A slideshow presentation on the Society’s history with commentary. Coffee Break and Farewell 4:30 PM ANGELUS PRESS 2915 Forest Ave. Kansas City, MO 64109 tel (816) 753-3150 fax (816) 753-3557 To learn more about our upcoming conference, visit our website: www.angeluspress.org The “Instaurare omnia in Christo — To restore all things in Christ.” ngelus Volume XXXIII, Number 9 SEPTEMBER 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 FR. ARNAUD ROSTAND Angelus Press EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Miss Anne Stinnett DESIGN AND LAYOUT Mr. Simon Townshend COMPTROLLER Mr. Robert Wiemann, CPA 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 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 $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. U.S. District Superior, Fr. Arnaud Rostand 7 SOME BACKGROUND TO ANGLICANORUM COETIBUS Fr. Philippe Toulza, FSSPX 10 SUMMA THEOLOGIAE PART 2 Fr. Albert, OP 13 THE LORD’S PRAYER PART 5 Fr. Thomas Jatzkowski, FSSPX 16 THE “SPIRIT OF VATICAN II”: BRIAN MOORE’S CATHOLICS Dr. James Cantrell Scene from the movie, The Conflict, an adaptation of Brian Moore’s Catholics. 21 DANTE’S PURGATORIO: READING AND COMMENTARY PART 5 Dr. David Allen White 27 THE PIRATE’S PRISONER PART 5 Fr. Joseph Spillmann, SJ 32 THE QUESTIONABLE PRACTICES OF THE CCHD 34 THE AUTHORITY OF VATICAN II QUESTIONED PART 9 Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre 37 CHURCH AND WORLD 41 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Fr. Peter Scott, FSSPX 43 THE LAST WORD Msgr. Brunero Gherardini ON OUR COVER: Arial view of the Second Vatican Council in session. 2 Letter from the Editor One of the major questions raised by the SSPX concerns the acceptability of Vatican II. The debate around this Council created an entirely new genre of literature since those who “saw that something was wrong in the Church” were not people who wanted to act against the Church, especially not on the basis of mere impressions. There was thus a great need for sound and objective sources of judgment. As an unbiased opinion was not to be expected from the hierarchy, certain writers distinguished themselves by uniting competence with a sensus Ecclesiae. A traditionalist “preservation of the Catholic Faith” thus became prevalent. Authors included Archbishop Lefebvre, John Senior, Michael Davies, Romano Amerio, and others. The general justification of Vatican II and objection to traditionalists was that the existence of abuses did not prove that the general tenor of the Council was wrong. “The abuse of the Council does not make a proper use impossible.” This was the line of the moderate conservatives. They thus tried to save the Council by attacking, at least in theory, new practices which seemed not only strange but often openly opposed to Catholic doctrine and morals. This way of defending Vatican II became more and more unsatisfying: 45 years after the Council, one still has to struggle with the negative side effects of a “New Pentecost.” Further, the decline of the Church became so obvious by the lack of vocations, and in the moral problems which seem to be the very consequence of the “spirit of Vatican II,” that even Pope Benedict XVI, who openly declares his commitment to the Council (in which he participated), sees no other way than restoring to the traditional Mass its rights, which it never lost, but which were suppressed. A look at the literature of the past 40 years shows that the criticisms which arose right after the closing of the Council (1965) are today more valid than ever before. We are here talking about saving the Catholic Church from complete ruin. Recently in certain places bishops have started to close parishes and tear down old churches–sometimes real treasures of Catholic sacred art. People complain, not realizing that what is happening is only the last chapter in a book which started out in the ’60s. This book could carry the title “The self-destruction of the Catholic Church” or “How Modernism and Vatican II undermine and destroy Faith and Morals.” THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org Forty-six years after the end of the Council, the Church is suffering from those problems which have never been addressed and which were banished from official discussions. You were not allowed to say that the New Mass smacks of a Protestant spirit and neglects the typical Catholic elements of worship; you were not allowed to say that priests, Brothers and Sisters shouldn’t wear lay clothes but instead something which would be fitting for their office and which would distinguish them from the laity; you were not allowed to say that women gave grievous scandal by immodest clothing; that dating is geared towards marriage, and marriage towards children. All these things one simply was not allowed to say. But you could still read them in Open Letter to Confused Catholics by Archbishop Lefebvre, in Iota Unum by Romano Amerio, in many books of Michael Davies, and in John Senior’s The Death of Christian Culture and The Restoration of Christian Culture. All these things one could not say, but they were still true. For a Catholic, obedience is a virtue, but obedience can be abused. The fact that certain things were not allowed to be uttered or even to be thought did not make them wrong. Any institution in decline will try to keep going forward by any means possible. But the moment will come when the decline becomes so evident that a reform is inevitable– reform or death. An interesting approach to this very subject can be found in the novel Catholics by Brian Moore, published in 1972: It is a parable which takes place in an imaginary near future. In the book, Vatican Council IV has completed the Catholic Church’s capitulation to the spirit of secularism. Talks leading to a merger between Catholicism and Buddhism are proceeding nicely. Church authorities understand the Mass to be a purely symbolic ritual. Religion is seen as primarily an engine of social change. Certainly, the solution of the atheist writer does not go beyond a modernist religion of sentiments. But what can you expect from a writer in a time when Catholics and even Church officials have become like salt which has “lost its savor”? Is it then astonishing that those who want to maintain the substance of Catholic Faith assist at the Latin Mass, not as if it were a magic formula, but as being the summary of Catholic doctrine and morals? Instaurare Omnia in Christo, Fr. Markus Heggenberger EXCLUSIVE ANGELUS PRESS INTERVIEW3 FR. ARNAUD ROSTAND PART 1 Fr. Arnaud Rostand is the Superior of the U.S. District of the Society of Saint Pius X. Father, you were kind enough to grant an interview to The Angelus in the May 2009 issue. We would like to add some ideas and answers in this issue. First, what do you think of the development of the U. S. District? On several occasions, I have expressed how impressed I am by the U.S. District of the Society of Saint Pius X. The families, the many children, the dedication of so many faithful, are but some aspects of its strength. The work that has been done over the years, especially around our priories and schools, but also in the missions, the Mass centers we serve only on Sundays, is tremendous. I see also a great unity among the priests of the District. These are just a few of the strong points of the Society of Saint Pius X throughout the world, but particularly in America. Is that to say that everything is perfect, that we don’t have to do anything and let things go? Of course not, there is still much to do and improve. The first aspect I wish to work on is the doctrinal formation of the faithful who trust in us. The crisis in the Church is a crisis of Faith, a decrease and corruption of the Catholic Doctrine, and the penetration of Liberal ideas into Catholic principles. They not only lessen or destroy the Catholic Faith, but also affect the whole of society. Each year we see more civil laws that contradict the Faith. Increasingly, the world we live in becomes more pagan, and this has an effect on everyone. We must protect ourselves from becoming Liberals! The means to achieve this is to study and deepen our knowledge of true Catholic Doctrine; and the most efficient way to do so is to read the books of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. I believe that this cannot be emphasized enough. Two books especially helpful to this end are Open Letter to Confused Catholics and They Have Uncrowned Him (Angelus Press). These, among others, are books that we should read and read again. Let us not be complacent with what we have built over the years and risk falling into a certain mediocrity or lukewarmness. If we do not wish to fall, we must never forget that we are on a crusade, a battle of doctrine, based on doctrine. If we do not make the effort to understand this crusade–and this applies not only to the priests and religious, but also to you faithful–we will not be able to resist or to succeed in vanquishing the liberalization of our lives. In order to strengthen the doctrinal aspect of this crusade, our first means is to develop our schools. The formation we are bound to give to the youth is crucial. And it is not only a moral formation, principles of personal life, it is first and foremost an intellectual formation, a doctrinal formation. That is why our emphasis will focus on our schools; to improve them and to make sure the youth are given the principles that they need to lead a Catholic life, in order to resist a world that is attacking the Faith increasingly. Some milestones have been reached in the relationship with Rome. What do you think are the most important ones? The first reality that must be understood is the fact that the Catholic Church for decades, has been going through a dreadful crisis. It is a reality, and one which the authorities in the Church, in Rome as well as in the dioceses, must acknowledge. The popes, from Paul VI to Benedict XVI, have recognized this fact. On June 29, 1972, Pope Paul VI stunned the world with the words: “From some www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 4 fissure the smoke of Satan entered into the temple of God.” John Paul II spoke of a “silent apostasy.” Benedict XVI, or more exactly Cardinal Ratzinger has, particularly in his meditation of the way of the cross in 2005, expressed the same idea: “Your Church often seems like a boat about to sink, a boat taking in water on every side.” Nevertheless, is it the common understanding throughout the Church? Certainly not. The bishops give the impression that they do not see any problem; they still boast as if there is a renewal, a new Pentecost in the Church since Vatican II: “All is well; there may be a few abuses here and there, but the Church is doing fine.” Even the statistics, showing a decrease in practice, in vocations, at every level, do not lead the authorities to open their eyes and admit the reality. They seem blind to the crisis. The Society of Saint Pius X does not make up this reality; it imparts itself to anyone who wants and accepts to face it. So the first step is to remind and to convince people that there is a crisis, and that this crisis has dreadful consequences for the salvation of souls. The second milestone to expose is the cause of this crisis. It is one thing to recognize a problem; it is another to understand where it comes from. As you know, the Society of Saint Pius X has always pointed out Vatican II as the source and cause of the crisis. The new doctrines introduced, or made official, as they already were in the background, even though they had been exposed and condemned by previous Popes, are not only novelties, but are against the traditional teaching of the Church. They are like a poison, perturbing and even killing, if it were possible, the Church from within. To show the contradiction that exists between the teaching of Vatican II and the previous Magisterium of the Church is the key answer and the main objective to achieve. This is not an easy task; they are so sure, so convinced that the problem cannot be there. What kind of argument do you think is the most impressive to Rome? I would not be able to say what is the most impressive to Rome. The discussions remain private in order to ensure the necessary freedom for everyone to expose their arguments. So, I don’t know what they are most sensitive to. What I can see is that the bishops in general are using the same old basis to attack us, which is obedience. They don’t want to go to the real problems. They send us back the ball, saying “you must obey.” They say that Rome cannot be wrong, and therefore we must follow. I had another confirmation of this recently: I visited a U.S. diocesan bishop. The agenda of the meeting was the possibility of the Society of THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org Saint Pius X’s buying a church from this diocese, a church they had closed and had intended to sell. The reasoning of the bishop was “We cannot sell it to you because you are confusing people.” There is no objection to selling to Protestant denominations as it is clear that they are not Catholic, but to us, the Society of Saint Pius X, by stating that we are Catholics, we are bringing confusion to the Church, they say. It is pretty bold to say that we are confusing people more than the Protestants! It is an easy argument based on the Pope’s letter to the bishops of 2009 in which the Pope explains that the Society of Saint Pius X does not have a legitimate apostolate: “As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church.” The bishop did not have any argument against the fact that it is an internal problem of the Catholic Church, but would still affirm that we bring more confusion than Protestants. Are we really doing more damage to souls than the anti-Catholic Protestant denominations? Are we confusing Catholic faithful more than certain so-called Catholic priests? It is difficult to believe that. The layperson who was with me and who is not a parishioner of the Society was not convinced by the bishop’s arguments. Anyway, they will continue to sell their churches to nonCatholics without any scruples and refuse to have anything to do with us. We read every day about so many priests or bishops who directly disobey the Church or the Pope or their bishops in grave matters; they still exercise a “legitimate ministry.” A priest in New York City decided to participate in the Pride March, inviting people to join him so as to “represent a church that truly lives the Gospel.” On Sunday, April 11, while preaching a sermon a priest in Chicago stated that he believes “women ought to be able to be ordained, as well as priests ought to be able to get married.” The priest has been “temporarily” suspended (and it is not the first time), but he received the Office for Racial Justice’s Lifetime Achievement Award in recognition of his life of service by the Archdiocese of Chicago! We can assume that he will be back in some “legitimate” apostolate soon. Obedience to the teaching of the Church or to the authorities is applied at two different speeds… The primacy of the Pope or obedience is not only misunderstood but also misused. In the discussion with the bishop, I could not get him to admit that obedience is subordinated to the Faith. He would agree that maybe Vatican II was not infallible but would still maintain that we must accept it, I would add, as if it was. “When there is approximate danger to the Faith, prelates must be rebuked,” wrote St. Thomas Aquinas. This false 5 notion of obedience unconnected with the teaching of the true Faith, might be the first thing to clarify, opening then true discussions on deeper and more important matters. Do you think that the priests of the SSPX, especially those in the United States, are expecting too much from the famous “talks with Rome”? As mentioned above, the priests of the U.S. District are very united. They love and trust the Society of Saint Pius X. They have confidence in their General Superior Bishop Fellay. Every priests’ meeting shows evidence of that harmony. The priests have confidence in the commission appointed by the Society and all those who know the members of the commission, Bishop de Galarreta, Fathers de Jorna, de la Roque, and Gleize, are even more secure, because of their sound doctrine and firmness of position. So I don’t think they are overly concerned about what is going on in Rome. The outcome of these discussions is impossible to predict. At this point in time, we do not see a real change of direction within the Church, even though there are a few good signs. The direction is still favorable to new ecumenism, religious liberty, and other novelties of Vatican II. In a conference given to the priests of the Fraternity of Saint Peter on July 2, 2010, Msgr. Guido Pozzo, secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, made interesting comments on the interpretation of the Council: It’s really hard to imagine a greater contrast existing between, on the one hand the official documents of Vatican II, the posterior Magisterium of the Popes, the interventions of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and on the other hand, so many ideas or ambiguous, doubtful statements, and often contrary to sound Catholic doctrine, which have multiplied in Catholic circles and the general public opinion.... The first factor at the origin of this contrast, he said, is “the renunciation of the anathema, namely the clear contraposition between orthodoxy and heresy....” The second factor “is the translation of Catholic thought into the categories of modernity....” And the third one “is the interpretation of the aggiornamento of Vatican II.” There is here an interesting critique of the new ideology brought around or even since the beginning of the Council. Nevertheless, Msgr. Pozzo still believes that this ideology remains external to the Council itself. Let me quote Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who already answered this thinking: The same people wrote the acts of the Council and implemented them. They knew very well what they were doing. Consequently, these reforms are the authentic interpretation of the Council. And since these reforms have caused considerable turmoil in the Church, we can say that the origin of the destruction in the Church is to be found not only in the reforms but also in the Council. (Spiritual conference at Ecône February 22, 1979) Are we going to convince Rome’s Msgr. Pozzo? Are we going to convince the Pope? We have to leave that in the hands of Our Lord and Our Lady. We do our “job,” we witness to the true Faith and we leave to God all the rest. We invite all souls of good will to pray for that intention. Certain people are arguing against the SSPX, and especially Bishop Fellay, having a general fear of their “betraying Tradition.” What do you think about this? We live in very confusing times. The deficiencies of the highest authorities of the Church have created a spirit of distrust; which is not good, but very understandable. Some of the faithful are therefore suspicious of a Society of Saint Pius X “betraying Tradition.” The usual argument is: we have been betrayed by the clergy in the past, so why not today. The Society should therefore not be talking with Rome. First, to that objection or suspicion I would answer that it was not the position of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. As far and as long as he could, Monseigneur Lefebvre kept contacts with Rome. In 1989, so after the Consecrations, Archbishop Lefebvre stated that he would have signed an agreement with Rome if we had had the possibility of protecting ourselves against the Modernist Rome and the bishops (Fideliter 68, March 1989, pp. 7-8). So, even at that “hot” point, it was clear in his mind that if it were possible, if we were protected, he would have signed. Now, when you read what Bishop Fellay says about the discussions with Rome, or Bishop de Galarreta, president of our commission, what do you see? Primarily, you read that these discussions are not at the level of a canonical recognition of the Society of Saint Pius X. They are doctrinal discussions about the errors of Vatican II. Secondly, the protection in Rome and from the bishops is repeatedly stated as most important in the actual situation. Without a strong safeguard, which we do not see as probable today, there is no agreement possible. This is perfectly in line with the positions and spirit of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Now, if people tell me that it is dangerous, that they are trying to trap us… I say, of course it is dangerous. But then, it is not a question of principle; it is a question of prudence. Is it prudent to entertain “talks” with Rome? The one who has the graces and the authority to make this decision is no one but Bishop Fellay. www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 6 A large conference of the SSPX has been announced for October 2010. What is the goal and what do you expect from it? The Society of Saint Pius X is organizing for the first time in the United States, a series of conferences, in October 2010. The 40th anniversary of the Society is the opportunity to conduct this gathering in honor of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The conferences will illustrate the life of our founder, his work and especially the transmission and defense of Tradition through the Society of Saint Pius X. It will be a celebration for 40 years of faithfulness of the Society to the direction bestowed by Archbishop Lefebvre to his successors. The presence of His Excellency Bishop Fellay, General Superior of the Society for the past 18 years, is a blessing for us and we rejoice to welcome him. The idea behind these conferences is to make the positions of the Society more known to the faithful. It is a project that I had in mind for some time; to have public conferences for the faithful to explain our stance in today’s crisis. I believe we can never study enough the work of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. This will always help the faithful to more fully understand what we are doing. Sometimes, I am amazed by how little knowledge many have of the heritage we have received from our founder, especially among the youth, but not only. Many people are worried because they don’t know or understand where we stand. It is my hope that these conferences will help to clarify things. My vision and my hope is that we will renew every year these types of conferences on various topics related to our times. (To be continued.) 2010Conference The Defense of Tr adition as tr ansmitted by archbishop Lefebvre Friday to Sunday Event 3-Day Conference From October 15-17, 2010, Angelus Press will host a conference on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the Society of St. Pius X’s founding on November 1, 1970. The theme is: The defense of Catholic Tradition as transmitted by Archbishop Lefebvre. This will be reflected in various talks from different perspectives: from the history of the Archbishop’s works and interventions during the Council to the rejection of liturgical and doctrinal novelties after the Council. The answer of the Archbishop was the foundation of the priestly Society of St. Pius X to keep the Faith alive in the Church. October 15 - 17 Hilton KC Airport The conference will be held at the Hilton Kansas City Airport. Complimentary shuttles will provide transport to and from the hotel. A formal dinner with limited seating will be available on Saturday evening, with a slide-show presentation of the history of the Society. Accommodations are available for children during the talks themselves. In addition to the speakers, various apostolates of the SSPX and religious orders will be in attendance to provide information and answer questions. Keynote Speaker Bishop Bernard Fellay Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X, will be the keynote speaker. On Sunday morning, a pontifical High Mass will be celebrated at St. Vincent de Paul’s, the historic church of the SSPX in Kansas City. To learn more about our upcoming conference, visit our website: www.angeluspress.org 7 F r . P h i l i p p e T o u l z a Some Background to ANGLICANORUM COETIBUS T he Anglican Schism, occasioned nearly five hundred years ago by Henry VIII’s divorce, saw the great majority of the English people fall into ecclesiastical autonomy, then into a heresy akin to Protestantism. The blood of the martyrs that flowed abundantly on that island’s soil no doubt saved England’s honor, but it also fertilized that ground and merited the numerous reconversions that have occurred since the 19th-century Oxford Movement. Did this same blood also obtain the steps taken much more recently by a group of Anglicans issued from a part of the English High Church (a current of Anglicanism intended to be less distant from the Catholic Church)? Let us review the facts. In 1991, the American Louis Falk, primate of the Anglican Catholic Church, founded the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) after divisions arose among Anglicans over such issues as homosexuality, the ordination of women, liturgical reforms, etc. He withdrew his submission to the one who is considered the symbolic head of the Anglican Church, the Archbishop of Canterbury (currently Rowan Williams). The new group needed a head: Louis Falk became its primate. Nearly 20 years later, the TAC, which styles itself a worldwide association of orthodox Anglican Churches, claims 400,000 members on six continents who desire to keep “the catholic faith” and “to resist the secularization of the Church.” From the TAC’s inception, its leaders approached Roman authorities in view of seeking unity. Meetings took place and an international commission was established (see below). The TAC considers itself a defender of Anglican orthodoxy, that is to say, as the guardian of the authentic Gospel message. It is in the line of the Oxford movement. www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 8 A False Parallel At this point some observers draw a parallel with the situation of the Society of St. Pius X: Just as for faithfulness’ sake the TAC has shunned the Anglicans who authorized homosexual clergy and the ordination of women and is drawing near to Benedict XVI, likewise the Society, which for fidelity’s sake shunned the modernist Rome of the seventies when it was engaging in aggiornamento and the liturgical reform, has sought at present to be reconciled with Benedict XVI–the canonical terms of this rapprochement promising, according to them, to approximate the norms defined by Anglicanorum Coetibus. To strengthen the parallel, some note that the liturgy utilized within the TAC is externally rather close to the traditional liturgy. The debate needs to be clarified. This parallel does not hold up at all. First, the TAC was originally Anglican, while the Society was, is, and must always be, Catholic. Try as it may to incarnate everything that is least heterodox in Anglicanism, no serious resemblance can be made between an attenuated and conservative form of heterodoxy on one hand and orthodoxy pure and simple on the other. Second, if Rome under Benedict XVI may appear as a refuge for the TAC, henceforth separated from the rest of Anglicans and the Lambeth Conference, from which one can only expect the worst, and long eager to return to the Catholic Church, it is not true that today the Rome of Benedict XVI affords Catholic Tradition the criteria of a shelter in its flight from modernism! Far from it. Lastly, the internal problems of the Catholic Church and those external do not intersect. The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, William Cardinal Levada, stated that the initiative that resulted in the Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus was not connected in any way with the first meeting between the Ecclesia Dei Commission and the representatives of the Society of St. Pius X that took place on Monday, October 26, 2009. Compromises Going back to the TAC, since 2002, John Hepworth, Archbishop of the Anglican Catholic Church, has been primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion. The overture toward Rome continued, and in 2007 the TAC submitted a request to enter into full, corporate, sacramental union: 1. We accept the ministry of the Bishop of Rome, the successor of Peter, which is a ministry of teaching and discerning the faith….We understand that, as bishops separated from communion with the Bishop of Rome, we are among those for whom Jesus prayed before his death…. THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org 3. We accept that the most complete and authentic expression and application of the catholic faith in this moment of time is found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and its Compendium…. Owing to the very serious defects of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and more generally to the conciliar spirit, what the Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus proposes to the Anglicans is obviously partly spoiled. One may regret to see these souls leave Anglicanism to affiliate themselves to the deformations of Catholicism which today hold the place of Catholicism. These Christians deserved better. We must pray that the rather traditional exterior forms they have retained (go and hear, for instance, Gregorian chant interpreted in the churches of some High Church Anglicans and you will be surprised, without mentioning the liturgical rites) and their mistrust of dogmatic and moral laxity will serve them as a rampart against what their intercourse with clerics affected by laicism risks depriving them of. But this barrier is not a sure thing. In an interview given last October 25, 2009, to Famille Chrétienne, Reverend Hepworth, primate of the TAC, was asked: “What would you say to the Lefebvrists to whom the Pope has also extended his hand?” He replied: I exhort them to consider Vatican II with greater attention. There is no reason to be afraid of it! Far from being an obstacle to our faith, it is a source of enrichment for us. It is not because of the many deviations that followed upon the Council that it is bad…. Here is a man who is not off to a good start! However, we must look further. Owing to the fact that these Anglicans have placed themselves under Rome’s jurisdiction (as did before, in better times, the Uniates, for example) a day will come when the Holy See, having returned to Tradition, will once again communicate to these hundreds of thousands of faithful the living waters of the integral faith and grace. A mother who is not educating her children today becomes pregnant: if tomorrow she educates them, there will be no regret over her being pregnant today. But it remains to be seen whether this “tomorrow” happens in a few dozen or a few hundred years or else sooner. Ecumenism Has No Hand in the Matter In the meantime, it would seem useful to dissipate an illusion, for the Roman authorities tasked with promoting ecumenism have been delighted by the news. An international AnglicanRoman Catholic commission, ARCIC, had been engaged for a long time in ecumenical dialogue to bring about the reunion of Anglicans and Catholics. 9 the United States of America. produced a veritable outcry, Cardinal John Henry Newman This especially in black Africa and Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-90) was a Australia. Last March, the Episcopal High Church Anglican during the first part of his Church of the United States gave life. He converted to the Catholic Church in 1845 its approbation for the episcopal and became a Catholic priest. He is representative ordination of a public lesbian, Mary for the “Oxford Movement,” a movement in Glasspool. As in the case of Gene the Anglican Church of the 19th century which Robinson, the scandal occurred in approached the Catholic Church. He was appointed the State of New Hampshire. a cardinal by Pope Leo XIII in 1878 because of Rowan Williams, the his merits for the Catholic Church in England. He Archbishop of Canterbury since is due to be beatified on September 19, 2010. 2003, supported positions that once again elicited threats of “schism”: notably, he supported the Common declarations were drafted on the Eucharist, introduction of Islamic law–“sharia”–in certain parts ordination, and authority in the Church (ARCIC of British law. I: 1970-81). Then they reached some accords In short, the overwhelming majority of Anglican concerning the doctrine of salvation, the Church as groups have a tendency to allow anything at all and communion, and Mariology (ARCIC II: 1983-2007). to plunge deeper into an intestine contradiction Cardinal Walter Kasper was delighted, in 2008, leading infallibly to a split. In this it unwittingly with the results obtained. As for Cardinal Levada, obeys the internal logic of every dead-end route he commented on the Constitution Anglicanorum (heresy, schism). And it is this first and foremost Coetibus with these words: that has pushed certain Anglicans toward Rome. This generous gesture on the pope’s part is consistent Ecumenism, at least as it is understood by the with the goal of ecumenical dialogue, which is union with Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, the Church. This remains the priority of the Catholic that is to say, as it is understood by the Council, has Church, notably through the action of the Pontifical no hand in the matter, quite the contrary. Looking Council for Promoting Christian Unity presided by Walter Cardinal Kasper. over the list of the Anglican participants in the different ARCIC meetings, one would be hard That same pontifical commission had invited the pressed to find names of those who had joined the leaders of the TAC to Rome in 1991 to map out the Catholic Church. path to unity. Every week, new Anglican “Churches” or But how much did all that count in the TAC’s groups of faithful petition to avail themselves of the initiative? Should the reason for this conversion be Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus: in February, the sought in the (very relative) gains of the ARCIC? Is TAC, the Forward in Faith movement (a group of it the greater movement initiated by Vatican II that Anglican laymen against the ordination of women), can boast of being at the origin of the event? Not and the Anglican Church in Australia; in March, the in the least. The leaders of the TAC themselves say Anglicans of the United States and Canada… But as clearly as possible that it is only the increasingly these groups did not participate, or else participated liberal and laxist deviations of the worldwide very remotely, in the ecumenical discussions. It was Anglican communion that pushed the members not ecumenism that made them depart from their of the Traditional Anglican Communion to turn to way, but their way itself. Anglicanism is finally the Rome. best apostle of flight from Anglicanism. The critical turning-point occurred in 1994, The blood of the martyrs under Elizabeth I is with the first “ordinations” (obviously invalid) of quite likely not extraneous to the move taken by women to the priesthood in America, Hong Kong, the members of the TAC and their imitators. We and New Zealand, and then rapidly in half the can be glad of this move. But nothing in this story Anglican communities of the world. Also, here and can be taken as the fruits of ecumenism. The mass there women were ordained bishop in a few groups. conversion of Anglicans, if and when it occurs one But in July 2008, the general synod of York, uniting day, will not prove the Council right, which opened Anglican laymen, clerics and bishops from the the windows so wide to let people in that it made world over decided by a comfortable majority, in everyone leave. spite of threats of separation, to accept the principle of the ordination of women bishops for all Anglican Fr. Philippe Toulza is the editor of Fideliter, the official French publication of Churches. the SSPX, and is in charge of Clovis, the French publishing house. Another threshold was crossed in 2003: Gene Robinson was the first Anglican homosexual to be appointed bishop in the Episcopal Church of www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 10 F r . A l b e r t , O . P . Summa Theologiae The Summa, Question II: The Plan “It belongs properly to the wise man to put order in things.”1 These words of Aristotle apply also to supernatural things: Wisdom must order them. John of St. Thomas cites in this regard a text of the prophet Isaias: Behold, I will lay your stones in order, and will lay thy foundations with sapphires, And I will make thy bulwarks of jasper, and thy gates of graven stones, and all thy borders of desirable stones. All thy children shall be taught of the Lord: and great shall be the peace of thy children. (Is. 54:11-13) The prophet here, he says, addresses the Church which, as the Apocalypse tells us, descends from heaven “having the glory of God, and the light thereof was like to a precious stone, as to the jasper stone, even as crystal” (Apoc. 21:11). This light of the faith that comes down to us from heaven is likened to a brilliant stone because, he continues, even though it descends from heaven by faith and obscurity, nevertheless it elevates and illuminates our mind…. But this light needs to be ordered by artifice and disposed by a wise architect into an edifice of faith; if the Church’s light, while we are still pilgrims here below, is said to be like a stone, it is because it does not shine out like the sun, but rather serves to construct an edifice, being polished by the disposition of the artist, showing forth its light and its truth. PART 2 The Summa Theologiae of St. Thomas Aquinas is justly one of the famous works of Christendom. Yet this book, meant for beginners in the ages of Faith, can seem overwhelming today. We give here an introduction to the Summa by Fr. Albert, a son of St. Dominic, in the hope of making this important work more accessible to modern readers. THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org The prophet, therefore, by this metaphor of stones and their ordering, means to express the doctrine of the Church, and especially of her theologians, who, like wise architects and artists, dispose and polish the truths of the faith so that “all the children of the Lord” may be instructed about them and find “great peace.” This, says John of St. Thomas, is precisely what St. Thomas did in his Summa Theologiae. Thus is it an important task to dispose in order these stones of Eternal Wisdom, and although a great number of Fathers and Doctors of the Church have applied themselves to this work, it is especially to St. Thomas Aquinas that Providence has reserved its completion. By the help of God’s grace he made in his Summa a synthesis of all theology and he disposed its precious stones in such an admirable order that it would be impossible to imagine anything that displayed more wisdom, more harmony, more proportion.2 As we saw last time in discussing the first question of the Summa, theology or “sacra doctrina,” 1 2 Metaphysics I, c. 2, Bekker 982 a 17-18. The Middle Ages excelled precisely in this sort of universal ordering of things into a harmonious whole, as is exemplified by the cathedrals constructed at that time. Another example is Dante’s Divina Commedia of which T. S. Eliot said : “Compared to any single verse of the Divina Commedia considered in its relation to the whole, the best verse I have ever written is like straw.” 11 as St. Thomas calls it, consists precisely in this work of reason that polishes, as it were, and orders the precious stones of Wisdom revealed to us by God. Having explained that this is the object of sacred doctrine, then, St. Thomas goes on in the second question to begin to treat of this object itself. John of St. Thomas beautifully comments on this key moment of the work saying : Having explained this question about the science itself of theology, St. Thomas lauches out into the deep, that is, into the depth of what is to be discussed (in profundum disputationis). This is to launch out into the deep, as St. Ambrose explains when discussing Christ’s words to St. Peter: “Launch out into the deep, and lower your nets for a catch” (Lk. 5:4).3 The object of theology is a profound depth, for it has for its object God according to the very reason of His deity in all its amplitude, that is, not according to one or other of His attributes, for example, according to His wisdom or His justice, etc.: but according to the very essence and reason of His deity, and all its attributes, which Gregory of Nazianzus calls “an immense and infinite ocean of being.” John of St. Thomas then goes on to give a general outline “attempting to show,” as he says, “the entire order of the whole Summa and the connections between the treatises which St. Thomas personally devised and successfully brought to completion.” He begins by explaining a first division: In this object so deep and infinite, then, St. Thomas allots as the order of proceeding to consider it in two ways: in its being and in its causing. For indeed, from being follows activity. Here we see already the properly theological, supernatural order of the Summa as opposed to the natural order found in philosophical works. The proper order, per se, is to speak first of God’s being and then of what He does, his creation, because of the general principle that activity follows being, but it is not the natural order for men, who know God only through His effects and therefore have to start there in order to ascend, finally, to His being known in so far as He is the cause of these effects. Sacred doctrine, however, begins with God Himself, in Himself, for that is its proper object; it is only after seeing this, then, that it will descend from there to what He does. This first section on God’s being, nevertheless, is much shorter than the rest of the Summa which treats of Him as cause because, explains John of 3 St. Ambrose there writes: “Although he commands the others to let down the nets, it is only to Peter that is said: ‘Launch out into the deep,’ that is, into the depths of what is to be discussed (in profundum disputationum). For what is as deep as to see the depths of the riches (of the divinity), to know the Son of God and to make profession of the divine generation? Although the mind of man cannot comprehend this by the full investigation of reason, nevertheless the fullness of faith embraces it.…Into these incomprehensible depths the Church is led by Peter so that she might see the Son of God rising up from there whence the Holy Ghost proceeds.” (In Lucam IV, 5, PL 15, 1633-4.) St. Thomas, “in this life we only know Him in the mirror of His creatures and obscurely in His effects.” This accounts partly for the difficulty of theology, for it can only perceive what it principally treats of “as in a glass darkly” as St. Paul puts it4: its very object is obscure to it and it must always look at it through “the glass” of the creatures caused by it.5 After speaking of God’s being, then, in the beginning of the Summa, St. Thomas will go on to speak at great length about His activity, His causality of creatures. Aristotle definitively determined the existence of four kinds of causality in the world of our experience, which are classically explained by the example of a statue. The material cause of a statue is the stone or wood or bronze it is made of; its formal cause is its figure, which is an image of the thing that the statue represents; its efficient cause is the sculptor who made it; and its final cause is the purpose for which it was made (to honor someone, for example).6 Now God obviously is not a material cause, because He is a pure spirit. Neither can He be a formal cause, for that implies a certain matter to which the form is united or at least a subject in which it inheres which is greater than it, and God is absolutely perfect and can not depend on or be a part of anything else. The causality of God then is limited to efficient causality and final causality, and according to these St. Thomas considers three modes of causality which determine the plan of his Summa of all theology: 1) God is an efficient cause in so far as He creates and governs the universe; 2) God is also a final cause, and even the final cause of all things, but most especially of His I Cor. 13:12. One might hasard a comparison here with the science of astronomy, especially as it is practised in modern times. The greater part of our knowledge about the stars, in fact, does not come from what we actually see (for they are too far away) but rather from certain effects of the light we receive from them, in particular by the spectrum of their electro-magnetic waves, which reveals a great deal about their composition and even their location. We know the stars not so much directly as through their effects. 6 Aristotle himself uses this example in his Metaphysics, Book VII, to illustrate material and formal causality, but, as St. Thomas explains in his commentary, it is just an example because, in fact, in a statue the figure is simply an accidental, artificial form and not a natural form that is part of the essence of the thing itself. “For figure,” he writes, “and other artificial forms are not substances but accidents. But because the figure is to the bronze in an artifact as the substantial form is to matter in natural things this example is used in order to manifest what is unknown by what is known” (Edition of Marietti, n. 1278). The substantial form of a bronze statue is the form bronze, because that is what actually exists: the figure given to it is just an accident that exists in this natural thing that is bronze. But the relation between the figure of the statue and the bronze of which it is a figure is similar to the relation between the substantial form of the bronze itself and its matter, so Aristotle uses this example to give an idea of what matter and form are. We will have the occasion to explain these fundamental notions more in detail later on. 4 5 www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 12 intelligent creatures who are capable of attaining to Him as an object of joy;7 3) God is also a reparative or redemptive cause of man who sinned and thus turned away from God His final cause. John of St. Thomas explains why this third special type of causality was made necessary by man’s sin: Due to the fact that the rational creature, falling away from its proper dignity by sin, became similar to irrational creatures who do not attain to God…God causes and acts in a third way as the repairer of sinners who have deviated from their ultimate end. God alone can repair them for just as God alone, who upholds all things by the word of His power, can repair the falling away from the first efficient cause, that is, annihilation, so God alone, who purifies sinners, can repair the falling away from the ultimate end; for the Apostle fittingly unites these two things when he speaks of the Son of God saying: “upholding all things by the word of His power, He has effected mans’s purgation from sin” (Heb. 1:3). For in saying that He upholds all things he designates His efficient causality, and he signifies His office of reparation when he speaks of Him purging man from sin. These three modes of causality, then, joined to the consideration of God in His being, are the basis of the division St. Thomas makes of his Summa, as again John of St. Thomas writes: Therefore Saint Thomas, by this threefold consideration of God as cause, namely as effective principle (Prima Pars), as finalizing happiness (Secunda Pars), and as redeeming Savior (Tertia Pars), divides the whole doctrine of the Summa theologiae.…Thus from God considered in Himself and in his being, we pass to God as efficient and finalizing and redemptive cause, in order to come back to Him in Himself as the object of happiness in the ultimate glory of the resurrection: and so is the pure golden circle of theology traced out by the divine Summa of St. Thomas completed. With the help of these considerations, we are now ready to see the plan of the Summa which St. Thomas places here at the beginning of the second question, in which he divides in more detail the Prima Pars which he is about to begin, while leaving the division of the other two parts for later. This plan can be represented as follows: whether God is (q. 2) the divine essence I) God how He is or rather how He is not (q. 3-13) those things that belong to His operation (q. 14-26) Just as the divine goodness is said to proceed in creatures when they go out from their principle (by creation) in so far as this divine goodness is represented in the creature by the similitude of this goodness that it receives in itself; in the same way in the return of the rational creature to God is understood the procession of the divine Persons, which is also called mission, in so far as the relation proper to each divine Person is reproduced in the soul by a certain similitude received in it that has its model and origin in the property of the eternal relation. Thus the proper mode by which the Holy Ghost is referred to the Father is love, and the proper mode by which the Son is referred to the Father is in so far as He is His Word that manfiests Him. Just, then, as the Holy Ghost proceeds invisibly in the soul by the gift of love, the Son, for His part, does so by the gift of Wisdom in which there is the manifestation of the Father Himself, who is the ultimate end to which we are returning. (Scriptum super Sententiis, I, Dist. XV, q. 4, a. 11) the distinction of the Divine Persons (q. 27-43) the procession of creatures from Him (q. 41-119) II) The movement of the rational creature towards God: Secunda Pars III) Christ who as man is the way for us to go to God: Tertia Pars 7 We see then the perfect order spoken of by John of St. Thomas. First we have the being of God (I, q. 2-43) then His efficient causality (I, q. 41-119), followed by His final causality (Secunda Pars) and His efficient reparative causality re-establishing His rational creatures on the road that will take them back to Him (Tertia Pars). What St. Thomas calls the “procession of creatures from God” consists in this– that each of them is a little representation of some aspect of the divine goodness, while their movement back towards Him consists in them striving for perfection and so becoming more like Him by attaining their good by their own acts. This is true especially of the rational creature because he is made in the image of God and attains his perfection freely. This beautiful movement of the procession of creatures from God by creation and their return to Him by their own free acts is described in a passage of St. Thomas’ commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard that brings out just how sublime the return of the rational creature to God is. Creation merely reflects the divine goodness in general, but this return reflects the very mystery of the Most Holy Trinity itself by the divine wisdom and love present in the soul that makes this return. We will see this more closely when we speak of the missions of the Divine Persons, but we can cite this passage already as a fitting close to this exposition of the magnificent plan of the Summa, which so perfectly contains the entire universe and its whole meaning : “And so considered in this way,” remarks John of St.Thomas, “creatures do not so much proceed from God but rather return to Him from whom they have proceeded.” THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org Fr. Albert Kallio is a traditional Dominican priest ordained by Bishop Fellay and presently working with the Society of St. Pius X in the United States. 13 F r . T h o m a s J a t z k o w s k i , F S S P X “THE LORD’S PRAYER” “Thy Will Be Done on Earth as It Is in Heaven!” Part 5 of 10 1) Introduction 2) Our Father who art in heaven, 3) hallowed be Thy name; 4) Thy kingdom come; 5) Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven! 6) Give us this day our daily bread 7) and forgive us our trespasses, 8) as we forgive those who trespass against us, 9) and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. 10) Amen. The third petition of the Lord’s Prayer may sound strange to the ears of modern man: “Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven!” The spirit of the times is much more the opposite: “My will be done, as on earth, so in heaven!” The most important question today is still usually “What do I want?” not “What does God want?” Often they will use as a justification the positive effects of a strong will: efficiency, self-assertion, perseverance despite difficulties, i.e., “challenges.” Wouldn’t you attribute a quick recovery to an unshakable will, and don’t people attend seminars in order to improve performance? Even with sincere worshipers there is easily found the attempt of a certain projection of one’s own will, desires, concerns, and worries on the will of God, along the lines of: “Dear Lord, Thy will be done but give me what I want!” The life of modern man is all about self-realization at any cost and the enforcement of one’s own will. In this atmosphere, devotion to God and neighbor, humility, and restraint have no chance. This modern mentality does not appreciate the restraint of personal will and capabilities, but rather crossing borders and boundaries It seems much easier to people in dark hours of trials and terrible blows to say this prayer to God, “Thy will be done,” because they are looking for some relief. Confronted with a very difficult situation which can no longer be handled by the individual, man might not turn away and suppose a divine intervention in the course of things. In a state of emergency, for example, in sickness and death, or in a crisis when everything threatens to collapse, modern man is much more willing to render himself to the will of God in view of his own helplessness, expecting from God that He may as quickly as possible repair again what man deliberately destroyed. The free will of man Why do we pray in the Lord’s Prayer, “Thy will be done” (Mt. 6:10)? Can a creature of God change the will of God? We pray, after www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 14 all, not for the preservation of natural forces, such as the gravitational force. And yet the Lord has given us exactly those words: “Thy will be done.” Why? This request first of all takes the free will of humans into account. The praying soul here asks God to be able to recognize and accept the will of God. Because of the gift of free will, we can accept and follow His will–or not. This is not a resignation to fate, but a childlike openness to God’s will. It would be a critical mistake to understand this request as an expression of fatalistic resignation along the lines of: “God, you do what you want anyway!” Then it would seem the lesser evil to accept being controlled from the outside by God and not to revolt against it. What a strange idea of God and the human being! Another extreme would be a scrupulous mentality which keeps searching for the will of God and refuses to make any decision on its own authority, following the principle: “Do not decide yourself, but ask again and again for the will of God.” This attitude as well would be a strange distortion of the Christian concept of God and man. For God did not give us free will and intelligence in order to make us abandon those faculties and replace them by exaggerated fearfulness and uncertainty in necessary decisions. God has never commanded us to abandon common sense. Both extremes are ultimately always refusals to trust God’s providence. The Christian Faith holds the middle position between the two extremes, namely, the trusting abandonment of the child to his father. The whole life of our Lord Jesus Christ on earth testifies to the essential focus of the fulfillment of the will of His heavenly Father: “My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, that I may perfect his work” ( Jn. 4:34). Precisely because in this world not everything is to the best, precisely because so many things are opposed to the will of God, our Lord Jesus Christ teaches His disciples this request. It implies that man is a free creature that can decide and act otherwise, even against the explicit will of God. Man is not a puppet of God. Nor, however, is God our provider, who should simply “work off our wish list.” How to recognize and fulfill the will of God? It is often difficult for us to know the will of God and to understand it. What is the will of God? First, God structured everything in a harmonious order. It is the apparent will of God that the laws and order of creation be observed. Moreover, God repeatedly revealed His commandments and made known His will to man. Our Lord Jesus Christ brings the will of God in the most important commandment when He says: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (Mt. 22:37ff.). In addition, another mouthpiece of the divine will is the voice of the Church: “He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me” (Lk. 10:16). “Thy will be done” is realized through the combined effort of God’s grace and man’s free will The expression “be done” is interesting. Our Lord could have said: “God, realize your will!” Or our Lord Jesus could have emphasized the action of man such as: “Let us do the will of God!” The expression “be done” clearly shows the necessity of both: grace and free deliberation of the human will. St. Paul recalls this: “But by the grace of God, I am what I am; and his grace in me hath not been void” (I Cor. 15:10). Likewise St. John Chrysostom (+407) argues: “See how Jesus Christ taught us humility, as He gave us to understand that virtue is not only a work of our zeal, but also of the grace of God” ( John Chrysostom, homily on Mt. 19:5). Why the words “on earth as it is in heaven”? “Heaven and earth” is a common biblical term for the entire creation of God. Our Lord Jesus Christ thus expresses, with this phrase, His desire for a not yet achieved universality in realizing the will of God. Do we not have the inclination to limit the will of God, to admit certain exceptions? The person who says the Lord’s Prayer asks not to be an obstacle to the will of God–and more, as St. John Chrysostom rightly points out: “Here again He wants us to pray for the good of the whole world. He does not say: ‘Your will be done to me or to you,’ but rather: ‘it be done all over the world,’ that all error will disappear, that truth appear, every evil will be destroyed, virtue will be fostered and no difference will exist henceforth between heaven and earth” ( John Chrysostom, homily on Mt. 19:5). We are therefore talking about a complete and universal realization of the will of God in all creation. As the condition of this full and perfect kingdom of God is achieved in heaven, so it should be on earth. As the holy angels meet the will of God without compromise, so all men should do this in the same way; that is the sense of this prayer. For God does not want to realize His will of salvation in man without our free consent. Man must first be open to God and want God’s help before God can act on him. This request of the Pater Noster is a strong argument against the “anonymous Christians” of Karl Rahner with the misleading assumption of an automatic salvation without free will. 15 which is imposed by God. This in theory is never a problem. But in practice, and in real life, the cross is almost unbearable– our personal infirmities, our family background, our job, whatever. The personal cross is humiliating and intolerable to us. How gladly we would have accepted a different one–just not the current one. The desperate cry for another, suitable, and “convenient” cross is loud. The trouble is, if the cross were nice to us and accommodate us, it would be no longer a cross! The cross sent by God must necessarily be humiliating and limit our capabilities. It is a part of the cross to be intolerable. In this third request, the praying soul expresses its Convent of the Pater Noster in Jerusalem basic willingness to accept God’s will at all times and under all circumstances, “My It is about the salvific plan of God, which Father, if it be possible, let this chalice pass from should be realized on earth as God has had it in His me. Nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt” mind from eternity. The will of God is His will for (Mt. 26:39). This is nothing else than the consistent salvation. implementation of this request. Why does the “will of God” in sickness, distress, and other trials not necessarily bring us closer to God? Everywhere the “will of God” is mostly associated with “health,” “distress,” “misery,” and “death.” Why? Man has a hard time tearing himself away from being self-centered; we relate everything to our personal lives and destiny. Few people today even have a slight idea of the salvific will and God’s work in the history of salvation. The idea of God is a one-sided idea of a God who dominates, who either does not care about people or, on the contrary, lets us feel with a “thunderclap” the whole weight of His power. I need not emphasize that this is incompatible with the concept of the biblical, Christian God of creation. A person who has to suffer is suffering from the harshness of his personal condition, but he does not necessarily think of God’s general plan of salvation for the world; the suffering person is not automatically a result of struggling to accept the coming of the kingdom of God. Of course, the plan of God for the salvation of man touches on the salvific plan of God; this involves the personal life, stories, concerns, and needs of each. SUMMARY This third request of the Our Father is a cornerstone of our faith demonstrating the devotion of man to the will of God, which is the ultimate key to the attainment of eternal salvation. At the beginning of every catechism, first and foremost is the question: Why are we on earth? We are on earth to know God, to serve Him, to love Him, and eventually to go to heaven. This third request fits perfectly with the first two requests because there we pray for the coming of the kingdom of God and for the sanctification of the name of God and all creation. Man, with his free will, is called upon to contribute his negligible contribution in achieving the plan of salvation and the saving will of God. Everyone must do what he can within his means! To be continued.) Fr. Thomas Jatzkowski, FSSPX, was ordained in 2004, and is currently prior of St. Teresa of Avila Priory, Hamburg, Germany. “Thy will” is found in the cross The genuine imitation of Christ always has something to do with the acceptance of the cross www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 16 The “Spirit of Vatican II Brian Moore’s Catholics reads nowadays like a parable on the “spirit of Vatican II.” The plot: The monks at Muck Abbey, on a windswept island off the west coast of Ireland, maintain one of the last remaining centers of the traditional Catholic faith. They remain deeply attached to the rosary, private confession, the Real Presence, and other practices that the Church considers outmoded. Pilgrims from around the world flock to the abbey to attend the Latin Mass and receive the old sacraments. This worries and embarrasses Church authorities, so they dispatch an American priest named James Kinsella to the island to shut down this scandalous anachronism. Though it was published in 1972, Catholics articulates debates and anxieties that have agitated the Catholic Church since Vatican II ended in 1965. THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org When I read Hans Küng’s “Open Letter to All Catholic Bishops,” I had to get only to the second paragraph to find the key: Küng is disappointed, angry, that Pope Benedict XVI has not acted “to promote an ongoing renewal of the church and an ecumenical rapprochement in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council.” Indeed, that is central to all that Küng has to say: Missed is the opportunity to make the spirit of the Second Vatican Council the compass for the whole Catholic Church, including the Vatican itself, and thus to promote the needed reforms in the church. This last point, respected bishops, is the most serious of all. Time and again, this pope has added qualifications to the conciliar texts and interpreted them against the spirit of the council fathers. The spirit of Vatican II, not the Magisterium, is to Küng and those of his ilk the final arbiter. Everything is, they shout, to be interpreted and adjudicated according to the never precisely defined spirit of Vatican II. The alleged spirit of the Vatican II council fathers takes precedence over all else. Rather than Vatican II being interpreted in the light of tradition, all tradition is to be interpreted in the light of the nebulous spirit of Vatican II, which always seems to find new ground to stake outside the parameters of what the age feels is barely orthodox. Vatican II is thus seen as a Gnostic re-birth: not a molting, but a metamorphosis, a shucking aside of that which came before it as at best worthless—and often as evil and oppressive–in light of the new Eden with its endless new possibilities for perfect peace and synthesis. George Weigel, no great friend of the Tridentine Mass nor of any perceived Catholic ‘conservatism’ that is not in step with American Republican Party politics, understands that and so charges Küng: What has happened, I suggest, is that you have lost the argument over the meaning and the proper hermeneutics of n II”: Brian Moore’s Catholics d r . Vatican II. That explains why you relentlessly pursue your 50-year quest for a liberal Protestant Catholicism, at precisely the moment when the liberal Protestant project is collapsing from its inherent theological incoherence. Naturally, as one with too many degrees in literary study, I read such open letters and think of fiction. The best fiction, or perhaps I should say the most important fiction, can, and will, address such matters, framing issues so that readers drawn to the story who fail to discern what is at stake from debates and analyses in various other formats will know the basic conflicts and see the results that reasonably can be expected. Plato’s dialogues, we should recall, are works of fiction in which all action is intense discussion, leading readers to perceive eternal verities, as well as to face a fact most of us instinctively prefer to ignore: that all ideas, all reforms, all revolutions, all cultures have a telos: an ultimate end that is inherent. The work of fiction that best captures the telos of the spirit of Vatican II is the 1972 novella Catholics.1 Its author, Brian Moore, was born in Belfast, Ireland, in 1921, the year when British politicians were finalizing the partition of Ireland, which wounds remain bloody and sore to this day. In literary terms, Moore was born a half year before the publication of James Joyce’s Ulysses, and Moore was a son of Joyce in that he chose exile from family, nation, and religion as necessary to his writing. Moore’s corpus is rather clearly anti-clerical, with Catholicism presented as stifling and worse and thus something from which to escape. Priests lacking faith is a recurring motif. It is, therefore, no surprise that Moore would have followed with interest the events of Vatican II, the rise of Liberation Theology, the rebellion against Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae, and the implementation of the Novus Ordo in 1970 J a m e s 17 C a n t r e l l and produced in short order a short novel in which he displayed clearly where the spirit of Vatican II would march inexorably if it were not corralled and then cast aside. Catholics is a futuristic novella, set in Ireland at the close of the 20th century, after a Vatican IV, which rather clearly ran according to the spirit of Vatican II. The protagonist is Fr. James Kinsella, an ‘Albanesian’ priest who is a product of Elite American education: he is a Harvard man. The casual or cultural-WASP reader will simply assume that indicates Kinsella is intelligent; the reader possessed of sound Catholic formation will discern that Kinsella’s professed Catholicism snugs perfectly into the anti-Catholic secular ethos of Boston Brahmin pedagogy. Kinsella is being sent by the Father General of his order to Muck Abbey, on Muck Island off the coast of County Kerry, to squelch the last Traditional Latin Masses in the world. As with most place names in Ireland that seem odd to speakers of English from elsewhere, Muck Abbey probably is an anglicized name from a Gaelic word. Rather than designated for a slimy mixture of manure and dirt, it probably is an example of retention of some aspect of conquered culture that is made to seem absurd in the wake of colonization and forced assimilation—which is very much the situation for Catholicism in the midst of secular cultures birthed by Protestantism. That understanding will lead a reader with knowledge of Gaelic to search for the original of Muck, and as the first possibility that will spring to mind is muc, meaning “pig,” and various words referring to swine are pejorative in the English language, the most probable assessment is that Moore intends for readers to equate the monks with things backward, www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 18 filthy, unfit for the decency of the parlor. And as the one thing the monks do that is hated and feared and ordered to desist immediately forever is to celebrate the Tridentine Mass, it seems a given that Moore expected his original readers, who presumably would have inclined much more toward John Courtney Murray and Hans Küng than toward Pope Pius XII, to equate the ‘bad,’ ‘intolerant’ pre-Vatican II Catholicism with the 1962 missal, which stands in the way of the spirit of Vatican II even after a Vatican IV. The Order knows very little about Muck Island, and Kinsella’s scant information is gained from an out-of-print book. The Monastery was built in 1270 and operates a priory on the mainland: “This priory, sacked by Cromwellian troops, was, in Penal times, a site for clandestine Mass, conducted in the open air on a ‘mass rock’ altar” (12). Muck Abbey has witnessed and survived the horrors of English Protestant depredations and persecutions, which means celebrating Mass even when to do so is a capital offense. When Kinsella arrives, he carries “a paramilitary dispatch case, a musette bag” and wears “greygreen denim fatigues” (16). He is the embodiment of Liberation Theology: contemptuously superior arm-chair warrior synthesizing Marxist Antonio Gramsci and the Gospels, the resulting ideology his faith. Moore uses flashbacks in Kinsella’s mind to mark the state of the Church run according to the spirit of Vatican II for decades, a Church that is tolerant of seemingly everything but historic Christianity, as Kinsella’s mission evidences. His college friend Visher, a standard cynic reformer, is the one who persuaded him that the new order, no matter its rhetoric while striving for power, must be authoritarian in order to maintain the revolution: “ ‘People are sheep... They haven’t changed.... Sheep need authoritarian sheepdogs nipping at their heels from birth to funeral. People don’t want truth or social justice, they don’t want this ecumenical tolerance. They want certainties’ ” (17). Thus the certainty of historic Christianity is replaced by a new certainty, a new authoritarianism of ecumenical egalitarianism that pretends to be anti-authoritarian and open to all forms of expression even as it acts to stamp out all vestiges of historic Christianity in the name of peace between all religions and all cultures. That there can be no accord between those two camps, any more than there could have been accord between Catholics and Gnostics in Antiquity, Moore makes clear to readers: “Their scorn towards him,” Moore writes of the locals and the multitude of pilgrims who come for the Tridentine Mass and of Kinsella, “his own scorn in reverse, met him as he went towards the stairs and the privileged bedroom” (17). THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org Kinsella’s scorn is highlighted by that of the Father General of the order. When Kinsella in another vessel of consciousness flashback–informs him that while at Harvard he had attended the Yeats School in Sligo, the Father General recites the line ‘What rough beast, its hour come round at last’ from Yeats’ “The Second Coming.” He equates the monks who celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass with Yeats’ rough beast and orders: “‘I want you to bury this beast’” (18). The Father General, perhaps another in a long line of sheltered rich kids become revolutionaries, is unaware of what a green grocer is and is not impressed that Tomas O’Malley, the Muck Abbot, is the son of such. He proceeds to belittle both the Abbot’s having been the Latin Prize winner at seminary and the Traditional Latin Mass by lisping “oh, lala” (18, 20) after noting them. The ‘hero’ who inspired Kinsella to enter the Albanesian order is Gustav Hartmann. He is the epitome of the Gramscian long march through the institutions in order to effect total revolution from within. He “had taken Holy Orders as an Albanesian monk, much as Malraux had become a Minster of State in the Fifth Republic, not for the obvious condition, but as a means towards social action” (24). The old Liberals, like Kinsella’s agnostic mother, saw the Catholic Church as something to be avoided because it was a bulwark against revolutionary secular ideas. But, “the Church, Hartmann taught, despite its history and its dependence on myth and miracle, exists today as the quintessential structure through which social revolution can be brought to certain areas of the globe” (25). Precisely because the Church is hierarchical and predicated upon discipline and obedience to superiors, if the spirit of Vatican II assumes determining power, the Church will serve the essential cause of spiraling revolution. Therefore, Hartmann trained a couple of generations of radical protégés to make the long march through Church institutions in order to remake the Church in the image of the spirit of Vatican II. Once Kinsella gets to Muck (the boatman sent to pick him up refuses to take him the first time because a priest is to be picked up and Kinsella does not dress as a priest), readers have it driven home that the proponents of the reforms, those spurred by the spirit of Vatican II, care nothing about what works and does not work any more than they care about denial of heritage and even defined doctrines. They are ideological reformers, dead-set on ecumenical unity. Kinsella has seen firsthand the throngs of pilgrims drawn to the Tridentine Masses, and the Abbot informs him that after the BBC exposé the monastery was flooded with enquiries: “ ‘I tell you, I could recruit enough young men now to fill a regiment’” (42). But Kinsella has no more concern for any of that than does the Father General of the 19 Order or, apparently, the Pope. In fact, it is the success that threatens Kinsella and others like him. If what has begun there is allowed to continue, it will spread, and then it will form the vanguard of the Catholic counter-revolution. Kinsella emphasizes exactly that in his reporting to the Abbot about the planned American TV coverage: “ ‘A program in the wrong hands, about this subject, could be made to look like the first stirrings of a Catholic counterrevolution’” (68). That might startle readers, for how could there be a Catholic counter-revolution against the Catholic Church? That is the gist of the tale. As a result of the spirit of Vatican II leading to Vaticans III and IV, both apparently overflowing with such spirit, the Church in this fiction has become the mushy liberal ‘Protestant’ denomination, just one among endless equal ‘Christian’ denominations and other religions, that George Weigel says Hans Küng demands the Church evolve into. It is no mistake that Küng’s final recommendation to the Bishops of the world is, “Call for a council: Just as the achievement of liturgical reform, religious freedom, ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue required an ecumenical council, so now a council is needed to solve the dramatically escalating problems calling for reform.” Vatican III, it seems, is necessary to keep alive the spirit of Vatican II. Hartmann had taught his students: “ ‘You must show them that while you are the Revolution and they are Tradition, the Revolution is the established faith and will prevail. Power is the concept they have always understood Use it, and use it from the beginning’” (92). According to Kinsella, Hartmann also believed much more in a welfare type uplifting of the poor, the Social Gospel/Liberation Theology, than in saving souls (44). Hartmann’s teaching has been successful, and as a result the Church has moved toward the telos of the spirit of Vatican II by staking itself to a type of a-doctrinal relativism focused on social welfare. When Kinsella tells the Abbot that he is not there to punish, the Abbot asks if that will be the case if the heresy (of celebrating Traditional Latin Mass) continues. “ ‘This is the end of the 20th century,’ Kinsella responds, ‘not the beginning of the 13th. How can we even define what heresy is today?’” The Abbot understands both the hypocrisy of Kinsella and those that sent him and the spirit of Vatican II: “ ‘Yesterday’ s orthodoxy is today’s heresy’” (63). The lapsed Catholic Moore was on the side of the reformers, but an Irishman writing about the Irish ultimately cannot resist using Irish history to show how the self-righteous conquerors and reformers invariably flip logic upside down to justify their misuse of power. Kinsella charges the Abbot: “ ‘You decided to say Mass on the Mass rock. According to my reading, the Mass rock, in Penal times, was associated with rebellion. Mass was said there, by outlaw priests, in secret, with some member of the congregation on the lookout in case the English soldiers came’” (66). The orthodox Catholic will recognize great heroism for the faith in that which Kinsella sees only as foreshadowing sign of rebellion against the spirit of Vatican II. Kinsella has placed the new reformers squarely on the same side historically and morally as the most selfrighteously murderous English Protestants hopeful of exterminating Catholicism. Among the great changes to the Catholic Church wrought by the spirit of Vatican II, and its follow up councils, are, in addition to the soonto-be extermination of the Traditional Latin Mass: there are no private confessions (they seem to be tied inextricably to the Latin Mass); Lourdes is no longer in operation; there is no category of mortal sins; the World Ecumen Council sets standards for all religious bodies; “No one said private grace nowadays. Grace was public and used only in mixed ecumenical groups,” Catholics have been instructed to say the Ecumen grace instead—even monasteries say the Ecumen grace (66-67, 21, 91, 61-62). Kinsella is certain that few Catholics believe there is any real presence in the Mass, for they, like him, see it as merely symbolic (70). The specific reason for the mission to kill the Tridentine Mass is that it is an embarrassment and a possible impediment to the “apertura, possibly the most significant historical event of our century, when interpenetration between Christian and Buddhist faiths is on the verge of reality” (47). The telos of the spirit of Vatican II is syncretism into utter nothingness. Kinsella approaches this task preparing to offer bribes. He had learned from Hartmann at Harvard that desire for greater position was an easy way to effect revolution, because the reformers could use men’s desires against tradition (54). But he finds no obvious envy among the monks to use, nor does the Abbot have any desires to be promoted to Rome for going along quietly. Remembering that the Abbot had said he did not think of himself as contradicting Rome, Kinsella realizes: “Obedience: in the end it was the only card. Tu es Petrus ” (76). If the order comes from the top, those who are obedient will obey. This is the end game of the long march through the institutions, and just as it would have been used to browbeat others into accepting the many changes from historic Catholicism noted throughout the novella, it will be used to force these monks to stop celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass. The Abbot, much less the other monks, cannot be bribed, but he will follow orders. Shortly after his realization, Kinsella hears a monk singing “Faith of Our Fathers” close to his room, and his response, which both ignores St. Augustine’s dictum that martyrdom requires the truth and the Church and highlights Kinsella’s own www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 20 love of power, is exactly what a person imbued with the spirit of Vatican II would think and feel: “What about the dungeons into which our fathers’ faith put so many poor souls? he wanted to shout. Sing along, you bastard, sing along, it will take more than songs and tricks. I have the power to order, to alter” (77). Brother Matthew, the singer of the hymn, later asks the Abbot: “ ‘Is he the sort of heathen who would be offended by the singing of a Catholic hymn?’” (85). The answer in the reader’s mind ought to be a clear affirmative. Father James Kinsella, who is the Albanesian order’s liaison to the “Ecumenical Center Information Office, Amsterdam,” (97) is precisely that sort of heathen. And he is an astute one. What is most interesting is that the Abbot will be a particularly easy shove into obeying the Father General’s directive because he is a priest who has lost faith and therefore has nothing left but obedience to those in charge: Years ago he had felt a certainty about so many things. Aggiornamento, was that when uncertainty had begun? Changes of doctrine. Setting oneself up as ultimate authority. Insubordination. He looked at the tabernacle. Insubordination. The beginning of a breakdown. And, long ago, that righteous prig at Wittenberg nailing his defiance to the church door. (86). The passage is a rich one that bears close scrutiny. The Abbot feels his doubts go back to the ‘opening’ to the Modem world of Vatican II, which, regardless of what was intended, allowed the spirit of Vatican II to make a gadarene rush across the world, seeming to change doctrines and definitely altering disciplines, turning many inside out. The Abbot sees that as “setting oneself up as the ultimate authority,” because it is a rejection of Tradition in the name of what is felt to be the spirit of the age. It is therefore insubordination against the Magisterium, which is the beginning of a total breakdown. And it is, then, as divisive and destructive as was Luther’s revolt. The Abbot’s thoughts link to Kinsella’s perverse understanding of the Mass rock: Protestantism and the spirit of Vatican II are on the same page and have the same target. They share the same road, the one George Weigel sees as an attempt to remake the Catholic Church into something largely indistinguishable from liberal Protestant denominations. It is imperative to emphasize here what at first will seem contradictory: that obedience to superiors is necessary to internal perversion, even destruction, in this case, in which men like Hartmann synthesized Modernism and Marxism, weaving the product into whatever valid faith they might have had, and then marched through the institutions, creating disciples and precedents as they ascended. It is the specter of disobedient Luther that frightens priests and Bishops, including those who have no significant faith doubts, into going along with THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org the spirit of Vatican II, and in so doing they fail to shepherd the flock away from dangers, in fact lead some sheep to embrace everything that the Kinsellas and Hartmanns would want them to embrace. Obedience to the deposit of faith is one thing; obedience to a ‘Father Judas Iscariot’ enamored of endless novelties is something else entirely. The Abbot knows that he will face withering opposition from the monks. Father Manus has made an eloquent defense of the Mass to Kinsella (49-52) and will no more be pacific in acceptance than will Father Matthew. When the Abbot informs them of the order and their duty to obey it, Father Matthew, “angry as Isaiah,” informs everyone of the admission the Abbot had made to him the previous night: “ ‘You also told me that we are to consider the Mass, from now on, not as a miracle, but as a ‘pious ritual,’ I believe you said.’ ” Then Father Matthew asks the key question: “ ‘How can a thing be a miracle one day and not a miracle the next day?’ ” The Abbot’s response is one that every person who has questioned the spirit of Vatican II has heard in some form: “ ‘Maybe you are a greater theologian than the Pope or the Vatican Council, Father Matthew, but I am not. I am a monk, and I do as I am bid’ ” (105). Matthew appeals to the monks as he deduces logically: “ ‘You can all see what is being proposed here. It is a denial of everything the Mass stands for’ ” (106). The novella ends with the Abbot facing the null with bare hope. Father Matthew again emphasizes what the new teachings mean, “ ‘that the sacrifice of the Mass is just ritual, that bread and wine remain bread and wine, that there are no miracles.’ ” In response, the Abbot declares, “ ‘Prayer is the only miracle....If our words become prayer, God will come’ ” (107). His answer, which reflects his painful desire for the certainty of God, is the Catholic version of Pharisees declaring after the destruction of the Temple that prayer would be the new sacrifice. It marks a new religion, concocted by men to fit their age. The spirit of Vatican II has triumphed, the last opposition bowing to its dictates. Moore and others like him expected such a future to unfold rather quickly, but devout men and women of faith praying and standing firmly eventually will overcome such temporal setbacks. Of course, as Küng’s Open Letter demonstrates, the real life Kinsellas, Hartmanns, and Fathers General will continue to stoke the fires of revolution as long as they draw breath, and the telos of their desire remains ever the same. 1 Brian Moore, Catholics (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1973). Page references are to this edition. James Cantrell holds a Ph.D. in English and is the author of How Celtic Culture Invented Southern Literature (Pelican Press). Photos taken from The Conflict, a movie adaptation of Brian Moore’s Catholics. 21 “Dante and Shakespeare divide the world between them; there is no third.” –T.S. Eliot DANTE Dante’s Purgatorio : Reading and Commentary PART 5 D r . D a v i d Let us begin a discussion of the Purgatorio by looking at Dante’s problem when he sat down to write the poem. It is essentially assumed that Dante wrote these works in order. We have the commentary of some friends that gives this indication. The Divine Comedy seems to have been written from beginning to end, and the poet finished it shortly before his death. Obviously this makes sense, since, in the work, Dante is the principal character; he has placed himself inside his own work and the work partially reconstructs his own spiritual journey. Thus Dante the poet writes this from beginning to end, showing the progress of Dante the pilgrim. As the Purgatorio begins, the pilgrim has made his way out of the pits of Hell. At the end of the Inferno, Dante emerges to see the stars. Each of the three parts of the poem ends with the word “stars.” In a sense, then, we continue to look upward at the end of each part. There is a sense of continual upward motion, even at the top of the Paradiso. In writing the Inferno, Dante had many things to feed his imagination. The first was a theological tradition which he uses often, ideas handed down over time about the nature of Hell. Thus he depicts Hell as a place of great suffering, a lake of fire, a place where damned souls are separated from the love of God. These pictures or images of Hell were handed down as tradition. Dante also populated A l l e n W h i t e his imagined Inferno with the damned souls, souls of legend or history or his time, souls familiar to him and his readers. And, of course, he also used classical mythology to further populate the place by adding Minos, the centaurs, etc. When coming to the Purgatorio, however, Dante has a literary problem. Purgatory was a long-established idea in the history of the Church but without the same tradition of accompanying imagery concerning its nature. Obviously we still have suffering souls, but how are they suffering in a different way? What Dante did not have was the rich traditional framework of images that was available for him when he created his vision of Hell. So while, at times, the Inferno might seem like an extraordinary work of the imagination—and it is—the Purgatorio is a step upwards in terms of imagining as Dante had to create the place almost completely out of his own imagination. The pilgrim was about to make a journey to a real place which the poet had to make real. It could not simply be a theological abstraction. It had to be a place the pilgrim and Virgil could visit. Due to the lack of rich precedents in pictures here, we have from the poet a created place very different from what he created in the Inferno. What does Dante do? For starters, there is a sense in which Purgatory repeats, but reverses, Hell. If Hell is basically a hollow, inverted cone of nine www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • Septemeber 2010 22 concentric circles imagined as a pit in the earth, then its opposite would be a mountain. Hell, in a way, has been an inverted city; there are constant references to this in the Inferno. The impression is similar to a mock fortified city. Remember the City of Dis with the furies on the wall, where Virgil is frightened to go further until an angel comes and opens the doors. The city, however, is going downward; it is not a real city since it lacks order. There is no sense of souls living together in harmony, working for each other’s good. It is a place of noise, stink, and hellish suffering. The Purgatorio, however, includes a genuinely fortified city. So now we have two images in the newly imagined Purgatory: a mountain and a city. Indeed, the city seems impermeable; it is not an easy city to enter. In fact, when Virgil and Dante actually enter Purgatory and begin to ascend the mountain, an angel is guarding the door (paralleling the Furies who guard Dis in the Inferno). They have to climb three steps: one white, one black, and one red. Then the angel allows them to enter and begin their climb up the mountain. The vision presents the angel as strictly monitoring who is allowed in. There are many souls in the ante-room, the “waiting room” of Purgatory before the actual entrance, waiting for their time to begin their climb. So the image of Purgatory is like a medieval fortified city. Think of an Italian hill-town to which no one can ascend unless allowed by the guards above. Some of these cities are virtually impregnable, and so is Purgatory. Purgatory is also remote. We have had glimpses of it twice in the Inferno. In Canto 1 of the Inferno, Dante finds himself in a dark wood next to a mountain. He thus gets a glimpse of Purgatory although he cannot yet climb the mountain. His soul is not yet prepared; he must go down to go up. In the Inferno itself, we get another glimpse. In Canto 26, Ulysses, who is going about in a moving flame with Diomed, says that when he sailed to the ends of the earth, going past the boundaries set by God for human knowledge, he caught a glimpse of a mountain far away in the sea. Thus, he caught a glimpse of Purgatory, a glimpse of a vision he was not allowed to pursue. Thus we also learn it is not just a mountain, but it is also an island. Dante adds a few details: this island with the mountain is supposed to be in the Southern Hemisphere. He claims, in the Purgatorio, that it is at the exact opposite position on the globe from Jerusalem. Thus, if you went to Jerusalem and dug straight down, eventually you would come to Mount Purgatory. He also claims that the mountain was created when Satan fell. The pit of Hell was created by Satan’s fall. As Satan fell from Heaven, Hell was created by his momentous fall. The image is that the fallen angel has not moved THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org since. Purgatory is then created from the displaced earth that resulted from the creation of Hell. This is wonderfully imaginative. This is the poetic imagination at work, giving us a vision of the unity of these places, connecting them as part of a Divine Plan. The mountain is thus conical. Mount Purgatory also seems to extend partially beyond the realm of human nature. It is a mountain on an island in the Southern Hemisphere, but once we climb that mountain, a physical representation of a spiritual state, we find the earthly paradise on top. So the earthly paradise still exists. Adam and Eve may have been cast out and those angels put out to guard so that they could not re-enter, but the place was not destroyed. It is still there. Dante the pilgrim, who, by making the climb up Mount Purgatory, will purge his soul of all the sins which beset all humanity, finally arrives at the state of perfect grace necessary to enter Paradise. When he enters the earthly paradise, he gets a glimpse of the Garden of Eden and describes it to us. Not surprisingly for Dante, an Italian, the earthly paradise is very much like part of Italy. He describes it as a pine forest that existed north of Ravenna, where he finally came to rest. (He was buried in Ravenna, where his body remains today.) This was thought to be one of the most beautiful places on earth. Those who thus wanted to see Dante’s vision of the earthly paradise could visit it until the Second World War, when American bombers took it out. It is now barren land. We can no longer visit the site. The description remains. Eden is thus at the top of the mountain. And, in fact, when he gets to the earthly paradise, Dante changes guides. Virgil leaves him, and we meet Beatrice. But there is one more reason for the image of the mountain. It makes sense in the language of the Scriptures. Think of Psalm 23: “Come, let us climb the mountain of the Lord.” This is how great literature proceeds from those educated in the Catholic Faith, knowing Scripture and the richness of our tradition. So Purgatory is a mountain and Dante climbs it. But in order to climb it, he must fight the force of gravity trying to pull him down, a simple physical fact. Climbing any mountain is always an effort because of the force of gravity. As the soul is trying to go upward, what is the equivalent of gravity in the spiritual state? Of course it is sin. As one is struggling to go up the mountain, one thus has to be freed from sin. One must overcome the “gravity” of human sin and error that pulls one back down. But there is a beautiful countervailing attraction on Mount Purgatory: God’s love. God’s love helps to pull one up the mountain. 23 There is a moment early on when the mountain is being described to the pilgrim and Virgil. They are about to ascend the mountain and are told there is no other mountain like it in the world. What makes it unique is that the most difficult climb is at the bottom; once they approach the peak, it will get much easier. And at the very summit, where most mountains are usually most difficult to climb, this mountain is easiest. So, the ascent of Mount Purgatory is presented as the precise opposite circumstance of climbing a regular mountain. This is a delightful depiction and a glorious idea. These few observations are only the briefest of introductory notes in an attempt to provide some structure to this remarkable work. One could easily spend a lifetime studying this one section of the poem; the Purgatorio is endlessly fascinating. Here are a few notes on this rich and beautiful poem. In the beginning, there is a vision of transition from the horrors of Hell to the new place of hope: For better waters, now, the little bark of my poetic powers hoists its sails, and leaves behind that cruelest of the seas. And I shall sing about that second realm where man’s soul goes to purify itself and become worthy to ascend to Heaven. Here let death’s poetry arise to life! Notice how, even in these first few lines, we find quite the opposite of what we just experienced in Hell. Remember that it was only in the first few circles that there was much motion in Hell. Think of the souls of the lustful who flew like birds or the souls in the river of blood who bubbled along as the stream moved. But as we sank lower and lower, there was less and less motion. When we finally saw Satan, there was only the mechanical motion of the wings and the mouth. As we begin Purgatory, there is motion in the very imagery: the ship hoisting its sails, moving across the water, the ascent to Heaven, and death’s poetry rising to life. So Purgatory is a place of motion and movement. The pilgrim, who was unsure and uncertain at the beginning of the Inferno, now knows exactly what his verse must do: it must ascend to life. As we begin the movement upward, as we come into Purgatory, art itself becomes more important. There are certain things which define the Purgatorio. One is the notion of movement: these souls are in motion as opposed to the frozen souls in Hell. The distance between the damned souls and the animating force of the universe is so great that the damned souls are paralyzed. But the souls of those in Purgatory are constantly moving. There is one peculiarity: the souls may only move when the sun shines. As soon as night comes, they are motionless. At that point, under cover of darkness, they may descend but they can no longer go higher. The sun is the vision of the animating force, the light of God, which allows the souls to move. We have constant movement, motion, and all the souls in Purgatory are pilgrims. Dante joins countless others, all of whom climb together in the sunlight. In darkness, they may descend again; free will exists in Purgatory. Let me give you the basic design of Purgatory. It is divided into three parts as are so many things in the larger poem. First there is the ante-Purgatory, the waiting room. There are many souls here, souls who will one day begin their climb though they cannot do so yet. Even in the ante-Purgatory, there is a division. The first section is for excommunicates. They must wait out thirty times the length of their life before they can begin climbing because they died without the official sanction of the Church. Beyond that, there are the late repentants. These are the souls who waited until the last minute to repent. They are also divided into three categories: the unshriven, the indolent or lazy, and the negligent. And finally, at the edge of the cliff, at the separation from the antePurgatory, we have the door which we go through to start ascending the mountain. The second division is the side of the mountain itself, the seven concentric terraces on the mountain which represent the seven deadly sins. As we climb from terrace to terrace, one of the seven deadly sins must be removed before a pilgrim may progress. As Dante begins his climb, an angel comes and inscribes seven P ’s on his forehead. Each one stands for peccata, sin, in reference to the seven deadly sins. Each time Dante the pilgrim gets through one of the terraces, one of the P’’s vanishes from his forehead, and a voice echoes one of the Beatitudes with great joy, a Beatitude that connects with the sin. Then we can continue climbing. Think of it in this way: if the human soul is a beautiful masterpiece created by God, time in the world, error, and sin have covered this masterpiece with layers of grime and filth. At each one of the terraces, the painting is partially cleaned. One layer of filth and grime is taken off as every P is removed. Layer by layer this process continues until the soul shines at the top with the beauty it was meant to possess and, indeed, possessed at baptism. (It is interesting to note that Dante has saved the seven deadly sins for Purgatory. He designed Hell differently. The seven deadly sins were there but arranged in a different order.) Finally, having survived the climb and having been thoroughly cleansed, we go through a wall of www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • Septemeber 2010 24 fire and arrive at Eden, the earthly paradise, the third part of the purgatorial design. But there is another tripartite division in the plan: the ante-Purgatory, the seven terraces, and beyond the wall of fire, Eden. What do we have here? Basically, nine parts: one waiting room, seven terraces, and one earthly paradise. Just as we had nine concentric circles in Hell and just as we will have nine heavenly spheres in the Paradiso, so we have the number nine here in Purgatory. Again: nine is three times three, the number three being central to the enormous design of the whole work. As we cannot closely examine the entire work, let us focus on one moment in the ante-Purgatory and discuss its design to help understand the design of the whole. Then we will move forward to Cantos 16-18 which are the center, not just of the Purgatorio, but of the whole Divine Comedy. In these magnificent cantos Dante gives us a great discussion about the nature of love, central to the whole work. And then, finally, we will move forward to look at the climactic meeting with Beatrice in Eden as Dante re-encounters the perfect love of his life. At that moment, his guide through the afterlife changes from Virgil to Beatrice. If we look at the end of Canto 5 in the Purgatorio, we get some insight into how to read the entire work. Starting at line 85, we are reading about the indolent, those who waited until the last minute to repent. These are lazy souls. We have already met one earlier in the canto, but at line 85 another soul begins to speak: Another soul said: “Oh, may the desire that draws you up the mountain be fulfilled; and you, please help me satisfy my own. I am Buonconte, once from Montefeltro; no one, not even Giovanna, cares for me, and so, I walk ashamed among these souls.” I said: “What violence—or was it chance?– swept you so far away from Campaldin that no one ever found your burial place?” We see that Dante knows this soul, knows this man. Dante asks Buonconte what happened to him at the moment of his death, for no one ever found where he was buried. The pilgrim is looking for information. The soul replies: Virgil, Dante, and Statius beside the flames of the seventh terrace, Canto 25. but as I died, I murmured Mary’s name, and there I fell and left my empty flesh. So Buonconte was in a battle, had his throat cut, and stumbles away from the battle as he slowly bleeds to death, his lifeblood flowing from his throat. He loses consciousness but at the last instant, right before he dies, he calls on the Blessed Mother. Now hear the truth. Tell it to living men: God’s angel took me up, and Hell’s fiend cried: ‘O you from Heaven, why steal what is mine? You may be getting his immortal part– and won it for a measly tear, at that, but for his body I have other plans!’ You know how vapor gathers in the air, then turns to water when it has returned to where the cold condenses it as rain. To that ill will, intent on evilness, he joined intelligence and, by that power, within his nature, stirred up mist and wind, until the valley, by the end of day, from Pratomagno to the mountain chain, was fogbound. With dense clouds he charged the sky: He said: “Below the Casentino flows the river Archiano, which arises above the convent in the Apennines. the saturated air turned into rain; water poured down, and what the sodden ground rejected filled and overflowed the Beyond it takes a different name, and there I made my way, my throat an open wound, fleeing on foot, and bloodying the plain. deepest gullies, whose spilling waters came to join and form great torrents rushing violently, relentlessly, to reach the royal stream. There I went blind. I could no longer speak, Close to its mouth the raging Archiano THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org 25 discovered my cold body—sweeping it into the Arno, loosening the cross I’d made upon my breast in final pain; it dragged me to its banks, along its bed, then swathed me in the shroud of all its spoils.” They still get floods like this in northern Italy from time to time. They are horrifying. The demon created this storm so that the body would be swept far from its home, never to be found. So we have here a battle over an individual soul. The angel wins and takes the soul to Purgatory while the demon takes out his anger on the body. His body is never found. In this scene in Canto 5, Dante tells the reader what happened to the soul. Curiously, in the Inferno we have met the father, Guido de Montefeltro. We get a parallel case where a moment in the Purgatorio reflects back to a moment in the Inferno. Guido showed up in the same canto as Ulysses and Diomed and appeared as a flickering flame. Dante encountered him and the voice speaks out of the fire to Dante: “If I thought that I were speaking to a soul who someday might return to the world most certainly this flame would cease to flicker; but since no one, if I have heard the truth, ever returns alive from this deep pit, with no fear of dishonor I answer you...” The damned soul speaks openly to Dante as he thinks the pilgrim will never go back and report what was said. But, of course, the story is recorded and we discover his secret. Guido continues: “I was a man of arms and then a friar, believing with the cord to make amends; and surely my belief would have come true were it not for that High Priest (his soul be damned!) who put me back among my early sins; I want to tell you why and how it happened.” So he was also a warrior who turned to religion. The High Priest is a reference to Pope Boniface VIII. “While I still had the form of the bones and flesh my mother gave me, all my actions were not those of a lion, but those of a fox; the wiles and covert paths, I knew them all, and so employed my art that rumor of me spread to the farthest limits of the earth.” He was thus well-known for his wiliness. Skipping ahead, we learn that he was called by Pope Boniface: “His lofty papal seat, his sacred vows, were no concern to him, nor was the cord I wore (that once made those it girded leaner). As Constantine once had Silvestro brought from Mount Soracte to cure his leprosy, so this one sought me out as his physician to cure his burning fever caused by pride. He asked me to advise him. I was silent, for his words were drunken. Then he spoke again: ‘Fear not, I tell you: the sin you will commit, it is forgiven. Now you will teach me how I can level Palestrina to the ground.’ We do not get the specifics of the sin, but the Pope is going to have Guido move against a particular Italian family whom he wants to strike. The friar is basically being asked to be a warrior again. Palestrina was the family home of the Colonnas. “‘Mine is the power, as you cannot deny, to lock and unlock Heaven. Two keys I have, those keys my predecessor did not cherish.’ And when his weighty arguments had forced me to the point that silence seemed the poorer choice, I said: ‘Father, since you grant me absolution for the sin I find I must fall into now: ample promise with a scant fulfillment will bring you triumph on your lofty throne.’ Saint Francis came to get me when I died, but one of the black Cherubim cried out: ‘Don’t touch him, don’t cheat me of what is mine! He must come down to join my other servants for the false counsel he gave. From then to now I have been ready at his hair, because one cannot be absolved unless repentant, nor can one both repent and will a thing, at once—the one is canceled by the other!’ O wretched me! How I shook when he took me, saying: ‘Perhaps you never stopped to think that I might be somewhat of a logician!’” Compare the two scenes of father and son. The one appeared to the world as a friar, a holy man, who did one nasty deed for the Pope and convinced himself by false logic he was absolved ahead of time, absolved of a sin before he committed it; thus, he never repented. So at the moment of his death we have a battle between St. Francis and a demon, with the demon winning. On the other hand, his son, a soldier who kept away from the Faith, repented at www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • Septemeber 2010 26 “Oh, please, remember me! I am called Pia. Siena gave me life, Maremma death, as he knows who began it when he put his gem upon my finger, pledging faith.” Paolo and Francesca were historical contemporaries of Dante.They had committed adultery and were both killed by Francesca’s husband.Talking to Dante in The Divine Comedy, she tries to convince him not of her innocence but of her “good reasons” to act as she did. the last moment, calling on Mary, shedding a tear, a sign of remorse, and making a cross. Another battle for the soul ensues with God’s angel taking him to the ante-Purgatory where he must wait for an extended time before he begins his journey up the mountain. These are magnificent scenes. We have these parallel moments where scenes in one part of the work comment and reflect on scenes in another part. Lest you think I am making this up, let us go back to Canto 5 of the Inferno. This is where Dante encounters Francesca da Rimini. She speaks from line 88 until 107 and then speaks again from 121 to 138. This means Francesca speaks more than almost any other soul encountered by the pilgrim anywhere. One reason she does so is because she is seeking to win over the pilgrim—and it works. Dante is so overcome by false sorrow for this damned soul that he faints. Let us look at one tercet where she discusses where she was born: “The place where I was born lies on the shore where the river Po with its attendant streams descends to seek its final resting place.” Now let us look at Canto 5 of the Purgatorio. Right after Buonconte of Montefeltro finishes speaking, without introduction we suddenly hear another voice: “Oh, please, when you are in the world again and are quite rested from your journey here,” a third soul, following on the second, said, THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org She is there with those who repented late; the soft voice comes from another female soul who speaks to the pilgrim. Compare this gentle, brief utterance with that of Francesca, who goes on at length when she talks. Notice the difference even in the introduction of the two. In Canto 5 of the Inferno, Francesca greets Dante by saying, “O living creature, gracious and so kind, / who makes his way here through this dingy air / to visit us who stained the world with blood.” In Canto 5 of the Purgatorio, La Pia (as she is known) simply says “Oh, please...” Modesty, humility, and meekness shine through. She is barely willing to interrupt the pilgrim on his journey. Further, Francesa says, “If we could claim as friend the King of Kings, / we would beseech Him that He grant you peace, / you who show pity for our atrocious plight.” There is a note of selfishness in the words. Compare it to Pia: she is asking for prayers for her soul. The souls in Purgatory need the prayers of those still living. Notice even the concern for Dante’s rest: she asks him to wait until he is rested. All the way through Purgatory, souls call upon Dante to tell people still living to pray for them. These calls are genuine and humble, and their constant appeal reinforces the fact that our prayers can help the souls in Purgatory. Compare even their references to their places of birth. Pia’s simple statement “Siena gave me life” contrasts the long tercet in which Francesca speaks proudly of her birthplace. Even in Hell, Francesca is still proud. The differences are staggering. Note also the mysterious conclusion to Pia’s words. With Francesca, we get the whole long story of her life, her love for Paolo, her death. With Pia, we get a short reference to her husband. Somehow her husband pledged faith which was obviously broken. Somehow her husband betrayed her. But at this point, these past events no longer matter—she is only concerned with her soul. The difference between the two is obvious. We understand why one is in Purgatory on her way to Paradise and why the other is in Hell for eternity. (To be continued.) Dr. David Allen White taught World Literature at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, for the better part of three decades. He gave many seminars at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, Minnesota, including one on which this article is based. He is the author of The Mouth of the Lion and The Horn of the Unicorn. All quotes from The Divine Comedy are taken from Mark Musa’s translation, published by Penguin Books. Illustrations by Gustave Doré. Catholic Stories of Adventure in the Mission Lands 27 Tales of Foreign Lands F r. J o s e p h S p i l l m a n n, S. J. The risoner (From Tales of Foreign Lands, Volume 2) Continued from the July 2010 issue. XII A Clever Daring ...continued Brother Francis concealed himself in his long mantle, and both disappeared in the dark streets. As they came near the house of the merchant Nagib, Elias quietly said to his partner: “So now, see that you get around the corner there and stay there, while I go in here for a minute; I will soon be with you again.” “Salaam, Nagib.” With this greeting the old shear-sharpener entered the musty little secondhand store. “I am, indeed, coming at a rather late hour to your store, but you know that men in a modest business like mine have little time during the day. I came to inquire whether you still have any of the particular stones as I formerly bought from you. My last one is well worn down, and it is time that I replace it with a new one.” “Certainly, I still have them; if you have enough money, I can sell you a hundred of them.” “I thank you for your kindness, but I could not hope to grind off that many in the rest of my days. But, by the way, how is your son Hares? A wonderful boy! A short time ago he came to me with an old dagger, but I was overcrowded with www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 28 work at the time, and had to send him away again. Just now my business is much slower. I would be most pleased if I could do the lad that favor; tell me, where is he keeping himself?” “In a quarter of an hour he will be here, that worthless rascal.” “So, so, alas! Well, tomorrow morning, perhaps, I will come to get the grindstone.” “Provided you bring enough money with you.” “Don’t trouble yourself about that. Sal­aam, Nagib.” A few minutes later Elias was back with his trusted partner. “It is still a little early, Brother; the merchant’s son Hares is with the little fellow, and we must wait. In the meantime you can pray a rosary for our success.” “I have the beads in my hand already.” “So much the better; but let us go to our posts.” The two walked on silently. As they came to the next corner, Elias gave orders that the Brother slowly walk up and down the street so as not to cause any suspicion, while he himself disappeared in a dark passage­way near Achmed’s house. Behind the wall that surrounded the inner court, he con­cealed himself in the mantle of darkness cast about him by the shadow of the massive structure. Roundabout everything lay in deep stillness of the night. He had barely taken his stand at his post, when suddenly across the other side of the yard, the wall re-echoed the slam of a little gate; steps became audible across the stone pavement of the inner court, and a youthful voice in hushed tones could be heard across the way: “Be on your guard, noble Achmed; I will hold to my argument, things are not all in order with this little rascal.” “Bah!” answered a deep rough voice, “that was only a rat that became frightened in its slumber, and now you want to cover your cowardice. Do not lose any sleep over it tonight and come back tomorrow at dawn. However, one of the slaves shall sleep on his doorstep tonight, so that you may rest easy and not lose any sleep.” “We shall see who is right. Good night, noble Achmed!” The voices became silent, and Elias fol­lowed their steps carefully with his ear, and soon all was quiet again as before. After some moments of careful waiting he was finally convinced that the whole household was asleep, so he left his post to go back to Brother Francis. Together they sought out the best point of vantage, and the old shear-sharpener belied his age by many years as he gracefully climbed over the shoulders of his partner to the top of the wall. When he reached a safe footing on top, he loosened a rope which he carried be­neath his mantle and threw one end to the Brother to help him to follow. THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org “You surely are not becoming nervous, Brother Francis?” “Certainly not!” “Good, then follow me; the wall is indeed narrow, but it runs only a short distance. In case of danger, we shall be able to escape more easily from the top of the wall than if surprised by some unwelcome danger in the court below.” So they crawled along the top of the wall as quietly and steadily as a cat after its prey, until they reached the roof of the rear building in which Francesco lay a prisoner. “Elias, do you hear anything?” “Pst! Pst!” warned Elias; “not too many useless questions now.” As quietly and quickly as a cat the old shearsharpener climbed to the top of the domelike roof, where a round opening had been made to serve as a window to admit a little light into Francesco’s room. Anxiously he looked down into the deep darkness; everything was quiet save only the rhythmical sound of heavy breathing, com­ing from a weary body deep in slumber. By this time Brother Francis had reached the side of his partner at the point of the roof. “What now, Elias?” he spoke lightly. The old man laid his finger on his mouth as a sign that Brother should be more care­ful, and then softly began to give instruc­tions: “I will let myself down into the room by this rope and wake the boy. You ought to be strong enough to pull him to the top of the roof? As soon as he is on top, I will climb after him on the rope and then escape with the boy and leave his trap empty. But remember, we may not cause the least dis­turbance or we will have Achmed and the whole neighborhood on our necks.” “Good; may the saints in heaven give us aid!” Quietly Elias slid down into the room. When he reached the floor, he stood motion­less for a moment drowned in the deep dark­ness of the prison cell. “There, in that corner, he must be; for, from that direction comes the sound of his breathing,” he said to himself. “Hold on, just a minute, until I know where the door is. So, now proceed.” Carefully the old shear-sharpener measur­ed his steps to the right corner of the room; but alas, the table stood between him and the boy. At the first two steps he ran straightway into the table, which tipped to the floor with a crash that resounded through the stillness of the night like a thun­derbolt from a clear sky. Stunned by the sound, Brother Francis unnecessarily let out a cry for help to the saints in heaven. The shock roused the boy from his slumber and he sprang from his bed. 29 “Cecco, here, here! Come here, I will free you, here I am,” pleaded Elias in broken excitement. “Where? Who are you?” asked the boy. “You better get going, we are betrayed,” warned the Brother. “They are coming across the courtyard after us.” “Hurry, Cecco, we will bring you back to your father.” In a moment the boy was on his feet; Elias swung the rope about Francesco’s body, and the load rose into the air with a speed and dexterity that was unusual for the aged Brother atop the roof. “To your right, through the alleyway, then straight ahead across the open street that leads to the market-place!” shouted Elias from below as the boy swung through the opening and out over the roof. “Away with him as fast as you can go!” Hardly had the two crossed over the wall and rushed away into the street, when one of Achmed’s slaves dashed excitedly and bewildered into the room. But before the slave could gain his composure and see the situation, the old shear-sharpener seized him just as he was about to cry for help, and with a blow of the fist over the side of the slave’s head, he was sent sprawling to the floor beside the table. By the time the slave regained his senses, the old shear-sharpener had summoned up all his former youthful vigor to overpower him, tied his hands and feet and sealed his mouth to render him harmless. His actions proceeded so rapidly that one beholding the affair should have believed that all had been previously rehearsed. And in another moment Elias stood beneath the rope that hung from the opening in the roof. He had already taken hold of it, intending to pull himself to the top, when Achmed, in a towering rage of anger, dashed into the room. “Ha, by the prophet of Mohammed, you shall pay for this!” shouted the pirate as he raised his deadly weapon to the heart of Elias. The latter dodged the dagger, leaned backward, and before the pirate could regain his balance for a second thrust, Elias summoned all his remaining strength, took advantage of the unguarded position and threw the pirate, with a thundering crash against the stone wall so that he fell motionless to the floor. But now the dangers came no longer in single spies but in battalions. Through the long gangway that led through the courtyard to the little prison the old shear-sharpener heard the approach of an army of slaves, pledged to protect the interests of their master, for the protection of their own lives. With keen presence of mind, he locked the door, shoved the overthrown table against it, piled the shabby divan on top, and then pulled Francesco’s cot in the middle of the floor, directly under the opening in the ceiling. The slaves were threatening to force through the door. Finally the door gave way to the onrushing force; the sudden crash quickened the steps of Elias and with one leap and bound over the bed he reached the opening in the roof, pulled himself through, and crawled away over the wall to safety, leaving a disorderly army of slaves, dazed and bewildered, behind. XIII Safe at Last In less than half an hour Francesco sat safely in a quiet little room with the Brother. They were still breathing nervously, however, more from excitement of their daring adventure than from exhaustion after their hurried flight. Now the trials and sufferings of the past weeks began to fade away into distance, and his future joys began to unfold themselves all the more resplendently because of the heart-wounds that were still smarting from the pangs of past experience. How great was the boy’s joy when he saw his good old fatherly friend Don Isidore! And furthermore, in two days he would be able to greet his dear parents, the faithful servant, Ignatius, and Brother Christopher again. “Yes,” began Brother Francis, “my faith and trust in the loving Mother of God has not let me be disappointed. She has helped me in every need thus far; and, let me tell you, little one, when you grow as old as the oldest man living, even then may you not forget how the Blessed Virgin has stood at our side in the hour of our greatest need.” Francesco, indeed, had many a story to tell of the mistreatment he had to suffer from the hands of the robber pirate; especially during the last few days there had been four different occasions when he had been fearfully tormented because he would not give up his prayers to the Mother of God for those of the prophet. “O Padre,” he said to Don Isidore, “and that did hurt; I thought those people would kill me, and the temptation to give in was, oh! so great; but I constantly thought of your last words of admonition, rather to die than to give up my faith.” “Isidore, if Elias has gotten away safely,” said Padre Louis immediately, “he really should be here by this time?” “I am not worried about him,” answered the Brother. “That man is quick and clever. He will go a roundabout way in order to mislead Achmed’s men who might be following him. But wait—I hear steps; sure enough, it is he.” Hardly had he finished his words when Elias dashed into the room. www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 30 “Thank God you are here!” they all chim­ed together in one chorus of joyful thanks. “Yes, indeed, God has visibly protected me, otherwise the pirates would have saved me this trip here.” “So, now refresh yourself and take a lit­tle rest,” advised the good Father. “You can tell us of your miraculous escape later. For tonight, at least, you shall be safe under my roof.” “Allow me to ask the man a question,” re­quested Don Isidore. “Tell me, Elias, did you run into the pirate Achmed there?” “If he is not now dead, he will at least remember the impression my fist has made on him for a long time.” “’Tis terrible, ’tis terrible; then you are not safe here. I know what we will do, early tomorrow morning, or still better, to­night we will go on board the ship which sails to Catania; for I shall accompany the boy to his home myself. And I believe that you, too, would be a very welcome guest at Francesco’s home. For the future beyond that, God will provide.” “Good! Good!” the little one clasped his hands with joy. “How my father will rejoice, and dear mother, too, when all three of us walk into the little house on the beautiful villa at Catania!” “No excuse now, sir!” interrupted Don Isidore, as he saw that Elias was about to make some objection to his plan; “you leave this whole affair to me; good Giovanni will generously replace your measly business, which you must leave here behind you.” With that Padre Louis had left the room, but in a few minutes he was back again. “Outside there are two soldiers from the dey; they will bring the three travelers to the ship,” he said when he returned; “and for the rest, trust in God; may His holy angels accompany you.” Moved by the generous spirit of the zeal­ous priest, Don Isidore threw his arms about him and Brother Francis and embraced them gratefully. Elias and Francesco kissed the priest’s hand and knelt down to receive his blessing. And the party started out across the rear yard, hastened through the dark streets down to the shore, where the ship awaited its hour of departure for Ca­tania. The next morning, as the sun rose out of the sea, the Bay of Carthage became visible to the travelers for the last time. Back of them rose gloomily the dark hills about the city of Tunis, and before them glittered the sparkling rays of the early sun as they met with the lazy waves of the quiet sea. All sorrows and trials seemed pent up in the dark hills behind them, and the past seemed glorified in the splendor of the rising sun before them. A propitious wind swelled the sails, and the ship, arrowlike, cut its way swiftly through the deep blue sea. THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org As calmness spread over the sea the sec­ ond evening, one could hear the soft notes of the Angelus bell from the Sicilian coast. “If the wind does not change, another hour shall bring us to anchor in the quiet bay below Catania,” the captain announced to his first officer, and then climbed up to the crow’s nest, whence he could see the lights on the outskirts of the village, twink­ling like golden stars in a distant sky. On the deck also stood our little friend Francesco, and with him were the reverend priest, Don Isidore, and the poor old shear-sharpener. The closer the ship moved to land, the brighter the youthful eyes of the boy beamed with joy; he could scarcely con­tain within himself the volume of joy that tended to burst forth at any moment. A little later the moon had risen to a height where she could light up the city and sur­rounding shore. “Do you see that spiral tower over there, Padre Isidore?” shouted the boy. “That is the Convent Church of St. Nicholas. There is where my good friend, old Brother Chris­topher, lives. That is where my dear mother wanted to send me to school, with the good monks, on the day we awaited my father’s return; but, instead, those wicked pirates came and stole me. Oh, it was a sad evening, and many, many sad evenings followed. But now that is all past, God, and His Blessed Mother be thanked. And there, a good way to the right from San Nicola, do you see that beautiful bed of peonies? That is my father’s flower garden. And that white house which reflects the light of the moon through the bushes next to the flowers, that is our house. See! The windows of the liv­ing-room are brightly lit up—oh, my moth­ er! My mother! What will she say when I come back so unexpectedly? And my fa­ther and good old Ignatius?” “Yes, child,” answered the priest calmly, “it will, indeed, be a great joy, and we will thank our dear Lord and His glorious Moth­er all the days of our life for giving us this happy day. You have been freed not only from earthly slavery, but also from the dan­ger of losing your faith, and consequently from a far more gruesome slavery and a more fierce master than the pirate and his overseer ever could have been. But see, Francesco, we are now in the bay, and the captain is giving orders to anchor the ship.” Really, the sailors are tugging away at the ropes, the chains rattle, and even their rum­bling noise seems melodious in this happy hour. Under the tune of a happy song the anchor sank into the deep. A few minutes later Don Isidore, with Francesco and Elias, stepped into the boat, and the three were rowed across the waters to the welcome shore. They landed practically on the same spot where about a year back the little boy had fallen an unhappy prey to the hiding pirates. Francesco pointed out the very 31 spot to his companions; then he led the way to his father’s house. “This sudden surprise could be harmful to your dear mother,” said Don Isidore; “rather stay back a few minutes here in the garden, while we go ahead and prepare her for your reappearance.” This, indeed, was another hardship for the boy, who could hardly hold back from the longing desire to see his mother. The little minutes seemed like lingering hours. But they also passed by, and every last obstacle had been removed to draw back the curtain which kept the boy from his mother so long. Soon the door opened: “Cecco, Cecco, where are you?” The mother’s trembling voice rang throughout the little garden; and before an answer could be returned, the boy lay, jubilant, with tears, in the caressing arms of his loving mother and father. Then faithful old Ignatius, who had grown childish with joy, hugged him over and over again. After the first storm of joy had gradually blown over, the happy family quickly prepared a joyful banquet for their welcome guests. Only after several days of celebration would Giovanni allow the worthy priest, Don Isidore, to return to his waiting flock, who received their pastor with much jubilation. The good people had never ceased to Volume Coming3 Soon! pray for the liberation of their beloved shepherd, who had been ravaged from their midst. And now their joy became more complete when Giovanni rewarded the faithful friend of his little son by placing a large portion of his possessions at the disposal of the priest for the benefit of his parish. With this the happy priest replaced the poor little church with a worthy house of God, which was dedicated out of gratefulness to the Mother of God, with the title of “Mary, Help of Christians.” Elias, too, was richly rewarded by Don Giovanni. Francesco, however, soon went to San Nicola, there to attend school under Padre Battista; and, to the great joy of old Brother Christopher, the boy progressed so well that he always held the first place in his class. From year to year he grew in knowledge and piety. “I owe this to the Blessed Virgin, who has freed me from slavery,” he would be pleased to say whenever commended for the earnestness in his work. No wonder, then, that some years later, to the consolation of his aged parents, he became a worthy priest of God, and offered his life as a gift of thanks to the Mother of God who had restored his liberty and preserved his faith. Fr. Joseph Spillmann’s 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, Volume Three combines four of these stories into a single volume. Three Indian Tales “Namameha and Watomilka”; “Tahko, the Young Indian Missionary”; “Father René’s Last Journey” The Yang Brothers The four sons of the old fisherman Yang find themselves on opposite sides when the eldest joins with the “Large Knife” Society to drive out the Christians and other foreigners active in late 19th-century China and the next son, after a decade in a missionary school, aspires to the priesthood. The uprising begins and the Christians around Lake Talo must mount a defense against the warring Boxers under the leadership of the Yang Brothers. The Queen’s Nephew In 1551, the powerful prince Siwan invited St. Francis Xavier to come to his capital city. A celebrated religious conference took place in which the Apostle of Japan brilliantly defended the doctrine of Christ against the attacks of the bonzes. A quarter of a century later, an event occurs that leads to a powerful struggle at Siwan’s court between the king and his queen, and the quest of the young noble Sikatora, to know and embrace the truth. 336pp. Color Softcover. STK# 8478✱ $14.95 Children of Mary Toward the end of the 1800’s, the Abkasians, a people dwelling in the Caucasus Mountains, had been struggling to maintain their liberty against Russian supremacy. The clan of Urban-ok still clings to some vestiges of Christianity acquired from missionaries long ago and venerates Mary, the Mother of God. But now Providence, in the person of a young Polish soldier on the run from the Russians, gives the children Mara and Marjub a way back to the faith and to a better life. www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 32 THE QUESTIONABLE PRA The Catholic Campaign for Human Development has been allowed in the United States by the Catholic Bishops for many years to raise money from Catholics for the purpose of “helping the poor.” It is known meanwhile that a large portion of that money was used for anti-Catholic activities, like abortion. Catholics relied on their bishops, and those supported the CCHD and “ignored” the use of the money of Catholic taxpayers. It is a typical example of the crisis in the Catholic Church: crisis of faith, crisis of leadership and– let’s face it–crisis of character. The following spotlights may help to understand the issue. THE CCHD FUNDING HABITS EXPOSED Some weeks before Mass we are told that there will be a second collection taken up and the name of the cause given. The weekend of November 21-22, 2009, was no exception as the Catholic Campaign for Human Development was calling for a second collection under the theme “Families are struggling; Faith is calling.” The money is said to be used alleviate poverty in America. The question that seems to be on the rise is whether or not the money is being used for what it claims the funding is for. The organization “CCHD” has been exposed by the Bellarmine Veritas Ministries as having unfortunately funded groups that openly promote abortion, same-sex marriage, contraception, and other issues not in line with Catholic teaching. (Goodbadcatholic.com, november 19, 2009) THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org Washington, D.C. – The Catholic Campaign for Human Development, an outreach of the nation’s Catholic bishops, is coming under criticism for funding groups that support abortion. A Catholic pro-life outreach called Bellarmine Veritas Ministry analyzed the CCHD grants and discovered the problems. According to BVM, five groups that support abortion received money from CCHD according to its intensive study of CCHD grants from 2008 to 2010. “Unfortunately some of the groups funded openly promote abortion,” which is “not in line with Catholic teaching,” BVM explained.… (Lifenews.com) Matt Smith takes the debate over the Catholic Campaign for Human Development to a new level: He calculates the amount Catholic parishes paid to organizations supporting abortion and same-sex marriage. Smith calculates that since CCHD receives from $7 million to $9 million each year, and there are 18,280 parishes in the United States, “the average parish contribution ranges from $382 to $492 each year.” He then goes on to talk about the over $2,000,000 we know thus far has been given by the CCHD to such offending groups. (insidecatholic.com) T a N 33 PRACTICES OF THE CCHD CCHD = Catholic Campaign for Human Development ’ ishops B t i u Q s e es Ten dioc rty Campaign antipove 7, 2 010 July Reporter, . – At least ten c li o th a C ast , D.C National hin the p N GTO N WA S H I have decided wit nual collecops eir an U.S. bish pend or drop th ign for Human a us year to s e Catholic Camp es, and another s e th c r io fo d tion nt in their t least for now. e m p lo e a lo r d , s Dev ing fund H e b d a o f G a y ided ld o h h it is w B e r n a r d that he has dec naB is h o p l do June , said in diocese’s annua of its n a ig h ic e M w th l a revie sending to delay e campaign unti t e d . T h e U .S . le n is tion to th c t ic e s is c o m p campaig d e th a r n p o t e itte es an gran ubcomm funding practic hops’ s ’ s p o h g bis bis reviewin t to the currently eliminary repor in March. r gave a p ative Committee o have decided tr is nps wh Admin the bisho ollection cited co e f o l a r e v c Se the . So m d or drop ecipients to suspen ut some grant r rn grants when o cerns ab have had to retu y were directly ts the n ie ip rec learned ot in accord with ls ia c ffi o Church activity n teaching. Grant in some d e ey cial lv o v in al and so to certify that th r o m c li d e ir . u Catho are req activities recipients gage in any such n do not e hdnow.com) cc m r fo (Re U.S. Bishops P r CCHD’s Futu epare to Consider re Now Coalition ; Reform CCHD S All the Proble ays “Not True” That ms with CCH D Fixed WA S H IN G B is h o p s p re p TO N, D.C. – As the Unit ed ar Reform C C H e fo r a m ee ti n g th is m o States D Now coalit n ion (RC N) an th , th e today that det ailed reports n ounced on Campaign for Human Devel the national Catholic opment have to every bish been sent op the United Sta and diocesan pro-life d irector in tes. The repo rts document with grantees problems that have yet to be address C C H D. ed by the Compiled b Life League (A y Michael Hichborn of A L merican Veritas Ministr L) and Robert Gasper of B ellarmine y (BVM), the reports show th 5 0 gr an te es cu at almost C C H D are in rr en tl y re ce iv in g fu n d s fr o m th e volved in acti vities directly Catholic social opp justice and m oral teaching. osed to “We wanted to make sure chance to re every bishop view the fact had a s, because w people saying e still hear that all the pro h av e b ee n fi blems with th eC x claims are no ed , an d w e ca n p ro v e th C H D t true,” said M ichael Hichbo at su ch researcher for rn, senior ALL. “We bel ie doing the bes t with the info ve that our bishops are rmation they just want to m have. We ak to-date inform e sure that they have the most upation going in to their June The RC N co m eetin al ition noted th ops’ upcomin at during the g.” g meeting the bishC C H D will b in light of a re e discussed cent report co mp Zubik of the D iocese of Pitts iled by Bishop David burgh. “Good thin C C H D, and th gs have started to happen with the ere appears to real reform,” said Robert G be momentum toward asper, presiden “It has becom to e solved merely clear that the problems f BVM. ca by defunding get caught op individual gro n’t be posing the C ups that hu must continu e to respectfu rch, which is why we lly call for a reform of C C complete H D.” Stephen Phel an , co m mun RC N and a m ember of Hu ications manager for man Life Inte voiced a wish rnat th the informatio at the bishops “prayerfull ional, y n presented, sy st em ic p ro considering h review b le m s o cc u rr ow such ed an d w h at prudent way forward is for th e m o st the C C H D.” (LifeSitenew s.com, June 1, 2 010) www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 34 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 9 The Modernist Tradition Spiritual conference at Ecône, December 2, 1976: Archbishop Lefebvre dwells on the false, modernist ideas of living tradition and evolving truth.–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 • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org You can read the letter the Holy Father wrote me since it is published in the Valais newspaper in its entirety. There you will see that the notion given of the Church and of Tradition borders on modernism; in any case, it is the very notion Pope Pius X opposed in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis. Pope Pius X explains that using the terms “living faith” (in a certain sense) and “living tradition” is a very delicate business. What do they mean precisely? They may have a correct meaning, but they may also have a quite false meaning. Now, one gets the impression that in order to evade these contradictions, in which even Fr. Congar finds himself enmeshed when he says that these terms are contradictory, they say: “But the faith is living; today’s faith is no longer the same faith as in the time of Pope Pius IX because circumstances have changed, because the faith has lived since then, our faith has lived and thus it has undergone modification; it is perceptibly modified, yet it is still the same faith, which develops like a living being.” A living being–but this is a typically modernist expression, and this is what Pope Pius X attacks in his encyclical Pascendi. He says that one has no right to think of Tradition or the faith as a living, developing being. The faith is immutable. It can be explicated, yes, but that is something else. To explicate what is implicit, yes; but the faith itself and Tradition when they have been defined, when they have been, I would say, officially homologated by a pope exercising his infallibility or by a council exercising the Church’s infallibility, these formulas are definitive. Otherwise, there would be no certitudes 35 for us. But, reading the Pope’s letter, one gets the impression that it would be the current pope, for example, who is the master of these truths, who could present us things which have been officially, authentically, and definitively defined, and the pope would be nevertheless free to change or modify these truths. He could present them to us completely modified because the teaching authority [magisterium] is a living authority [magisterium], a contemporary teaching authority [magisterium] that can very well modify what existed before. But this kind of evolution of dogma is absolutely the modernist idea of truth and dogma. It is absolutely contrary to the truth taught by the Church. What is the reason for the immutability of our faith? God Himself. What is the truth of our faith; what does our faith present us? Our faith presents us truths. What is the truth? The truth is God. And when an authentic truth has been definitively defined with the papal infallibility given by our Lord Jesus Christ, it means that this truth is, I would say, fixed in God; it is a definitive glimpse of what God is; now, God is immutable. The Modernist Magisterium A living tradition corresponds to a new magisterium, the conciliar magisterium. Spiritual conference at Ecône, January 13, 1977.–Fr. Gleize As they cannot base themselves on Tradition, since what they are asking is not in keeping with Tradition, they are setting up, I would say, a new magisterium in the Church, or a new conception of the Church’s magisterium, a conception which is moreover a modernist conception because, as St. Pius X explains very well in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, it corresponds to the conception of the Church as a living Church. Undoubtedly, the Church is living with a living magisterium; undoubtedly the magisterium is living, but it is still necessary that it not contradict what has been said previously. It is necessary that its teachings should be an explication, an explanation, of the dogmas of faith, but not a change, a change like something that is transformed or like a life that undergoes substantial changes. But it is this idea that they now have of the Church, and that is why Msgr. Benelli asks us to be faithful to the conciliar Church. This is what Monsieur Salleron said very well in a recent article–his conclusion is excellent; it is really worth reading, it is so right about the reality.1 In his letter of 25 June 1976 to Mgr Lefebvre, Mgr Benelli invokes due fidelity to the conciliar Church. [He also asked it of you, too.] Wittingly or not, the use of this expression is significant: a bishop no longer acts in a Christian manner from the fact that he possesses the Catholic faith and obeys Church law; to be Christian, and consequently Catholic, he must henceforth be faithful to the conciliar Church. [A bishop is no longer required to be faithful to the faith of the Catholic Church, but to the conciliar Church.] In what does this fidelity consist? In what does this complete innovation of a conciliar Church distinct from the Catholic Church consist? We are waiting to be told, but we note the innovation, we note that an increasingly ill-defined magisterium makes its own selfwill the supreme norm of religious life. The last sentence is really significant: “We note that an increasingly ill-defined magisterium makes its own self-will the supreme norm of religious life.” This is what we are coming up against! This is what we are always being told: “Obey, obey! You owe obedience to the pope, and if you are not obedient to the pope then you don’t have the true faith. Look at the first Vatican Council.” But the pope is at the service of the faith; we are all at the service of the faith because we are at the service of our Lord Jesus Christ. A bishop’s first duty, the pope’s first duty, a priest’s first duty, is to be at the service of the faith. The faith is not at his service; he cannot command the faith; we cannot decide the faith–not even the pope can decide the faith. He can define certain things, but which are already in the Church, which are already in Tradition. He can define them, explicate them, but he cannot dispose of them. He cannot say today, “That was said yesterday; now we are saying the contrary.” In matters of faith, this is beyond his power. Religious Liberty, the Main Fruit of the New Teaching An example of the new teaching, incompatible with the Catholic notion of the magisterium and of Tradition: the Vatican II Decree on Religious Freedom. Excerpt from a lecture given at Angers on November 20, 1980, and published in the book L’Église infiltrée par le modernisme (Fideliter, 1993), pp. 116-118.–Fr. Gleize We ought to recognize, for example, that in the Council, the Decree on Religious Freedom is contrary to what Pope Pius IX taught textually. What should be believed? I had a chance to say this to Pope Paul VI during the audience I had with him. I told him: “But, Holy Father, you say that we are disobedient. But what would you have us do? The Decree on Religious Freedom tells us one thing; Pope Pius IX, Pope Gregory XVI, and all the popes who followed teach us exactly, textually, the contrary. Which should we choose? I have always chosen and I choose Pius IX and the others, because they represent the entire Tradition of the Church; they represent what the Church has always taught for twenty centuries. So I cannot accept what the www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 36 Council says in the Decree on Religious Liberty because it is exactly the opposite. You are setting me a very difficult problem.” Do you know what he answered me at that moment? He told me: “Well, we cannot get involved with theological questions here!” Of course, I wasn’t there to discuss theological questions, but all the same, they are setting us very difficult problems. Personally, I am thoroughly convinced that Catholics, priests, must reject decrees like that one; reject them because they are contrary to the Church’s magisterium. There can be an unfaithful magisterium. A faithful magisterium is the one I was just telling you about, which is the ex cathedra magisterium, or the pope’s ordinary teaching authority, because he intends to impose the faith everywhere, in the whole world, and when he is in keeping with all of Tradition. Then there can be an unfaithful magisterium, a magisterium that is not faithful to Tradition. Because fidelity is a criterion. Take the words of St. Paul. You see, St. Paul said, “If an angel from heaven or if I myself were to come and teach you today a truth contrary to what you were taught originally, let him be anathema; let me be anathema.” What is St. Paul referring to? He is envisaging that there could eventually be a teaching that is not in conformity with what was taught originally. And where is he going to find the criterion IOTA UNUM of truth, the criterion of faith? In what was taught originally. Well, I am saying that the Decree on Religious Freedom is not in conformity with what was taught originally. All the popes have always said that there is a truth, that the Church possesses the truth and that there is no natural right to be able to choose between truth and error. But this is what the decree expresses: There is a natural right–and not just a civil or legal right; no, a natural right–based on the dignity of the human person, to opt for either truth or error. You can do whatever you like. Well, no, this is not true! Never has the Church taught such a thing. The Church has always said: One must adhere to the truth; we must adhere to the truth. Sometimes error may, in certain circumstances, be tolerated. One tolerates error, one does not adhere to it. You cannot tell someone that he may adhere to error or to falsehood. (To be continued.) 1 Louis Salleron, “De l’affaire d’Ecône à l’Église conciliaire,” Itinéraires, No. 209 (January 1977), pp. 86-87. 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. 43. CONSEQUENCES OF BREAKING THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK. WHETHER THERE WAS A CONSPIRACY. The consequences which flowed from the events of 13 October and 22 November were very important: a reshaping of the ten conciliar commissions, and the elimination of the whole of the preparatory work, so that of the 20 original schemas, only the one on the liturgy remained. The general spirit of the texts was changed, as was their style, in that they abandoned the classical structure in which disciplinary decrees followed upon a doctrinal section. To a certain extent, the council was selfcreated, atypical and unforeseen. At this point, anyone studying the council must ask himself whether the unexpected change 2010 in itswww.angeluspress.org course was THE ANGELUS • September due to a concerted plan made before the council, and outside it, or whether it was an effect of the natural dynamism of the council itself. The former opinion is held by adherents of the traditional, curial school of thought. They go so far as to recall the instance of the latrocinium [“Robbers’ council,” of A.D.449.] at Ephesus: the holding of a council after its preparations had been destroyed seems to them to be explicable only by concerted action, well organized by a group of very determined men. A conspiracy also seems to be proved by what the French Academician, Jean Guitton, relates of something told him by Cardinal Tisserant. When showing Guitton a painting made from a photograph, which depicted Tisserant himself and six other cardinals, the Dean of the Sacred College said: Ce tableau est historique ou plutôt il est symbolique. Il représente la réunion que nous avions eu avant l’ouverture du Concile où nous avons décidé de bloquer la première séance en refusant des règles tyranniques établies par Jean XXIII. [“This picture is historic, or rather, symbolic. It shows the meeting we had before the opening of the council, when we decided to block the first session by refusing to accept the tyrannical rules laid down by John XXIII.”] The chief instrument used by the modernizing conspirators, mainly French, German and Canadian, was the working alliance of the bishops from those areas; while the opposing group was the Coetus Internationalis Patrum, dominated by bishops from the Latin world.–Romano Amerio, Iota Unum, pp. 85-86. [Available from Angelus Press. Price: $23.95] Church and World Europe: The Council of Europe Asks Switzerland to Repeal Its Ban on Minarets On June 23 the Council of Europe asked Switzerland to repeal its ban on minarets “as soon as possible,” claiming that this article of the Constitution “discriminates against Muslim communities.” This legislation, however, had been adopted on November 29, 2009, by 57.5 percent of voters in a popular referendum. At the conclusion of a debate on “Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia in Europe” the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) voted to make this recommendation, which was approved by 89 votes without opposition, explaining that “the construction of minarets must be possible, on the same grounds as the construction of bell towers, while respecting the conditions of public safety and urban planning.” Last May a Muslim association had filed a complaint of discrimination with the European Court of Human Rights, which has not yet taken a position. (Source: DICI) Quebec: A Catholic High School Wins a Court Battle According to a decision handed down on June 18 by the Quebec Superior Court, Jesuit Loyola High School of Montreal will be dispensed from teaching “the Ethics and Religious Culture course” imposed by the Quebec Ministry of Education in the fall of 2008. 37 Switzerland: Canon from the Abbey of St. Maurice Joins the SSPX A canon of the Abbey of St. Maurice inValais since 1996, CanonYannick Escher, 36 years of age, left his monastery on June 29, Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul and the day of the ordinations at Ecône. He joined the Priestly Society of St. Pius X after discovering the Tridentine Mass and studying at great length the writings and conferences of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. A professor, students’ chaplain, master of ceremonies, correspondant for the Bulletin Paroisses Vivantes and of the paper Le Nouvelliste, “Canon Escher had deployed a great zeal in his numerous activities,” reveals the Abbot of St. Maurice, Josesh Roduit in a sad statement.–The Swiss religious is presently in one of the houses of the Society of St. Pius X. The Jesuit school administration asserts that the course’s contents conflict with the institution’s Catholic values. According to statements reported on the Radio Canada website (www.radio-canada.ca), headmaster Paul Donovan stated that Catholic values must be present in every discipline, not only in religion classes, but in the other subjects such as English or Physical Education. The parent of one student remarked in a report posted on the same site that “in the name of diversity they go against diversity.” The school is not against the whole idea of a course on ethics and religious culture, but merely wishes to adapt it to the Christian principles inculcated in the school, an adaptation rejected by the government, which through its lawyer’s voice denounced it as a “confessional program” that does not elicit the students’ questioning and does not present things in a neutral fashion. The decision finally proved that the administration of this secondary Catholic school, located west of Montreal, was right. The ruling explained that by obliging the institution to give the course from a secular perspective, the Ministry of Education violated the right to religious liberty. For the Quebec judge, “Canada’s democratic society is based on principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the primacy of law, which enjoy constitutional protection,” reported the local press quoted by Apic. The decision ruled that by obliging this Catholic school to give the course from a secular perspective, the Ministry of Education was employing a method “essentially equivalent to the Inquisition….” In his decision, he characterized the obligawww.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 38 tion imposed on the high school as totalitarian. Since 2008 when the course was introduced, the Ministry has received about 2,000 exemption requests. Till now, they have all been refused. (Source: DICI) Thomas Molnar, R.I.P. Thomas Steven Molnar passed away on July 20, 2010. A Hungarian by birth, he was one of the leading traditional Catholic intellectuals in America, especially during the turbulent decades of the 1960’s and ’70’s. After having been arrested by the Nazis and surviving a stint in Dachau, he eventually fled to America after the Communists took over in Hungary. A prolific philosopher and historian, he wrote over 40 books, not all of which have been translated into English. He can be found quoted in the early issues of The Angelus as well as in journals such as National Review and Triumph. Some of his more well-known works in English include Utopia: The Perennial Heresy and The Church: Pilgrim of Centuries. (Source: Angelus Press) Poland: Fewer and Fewer Catholics Practicing Statistics collected over all of Polish territory in all the parishes during the last three months of 2009 reveal a slow revival of frequenting the Mass in 2009, going from 40.5 percent of the country’s 38 million inhabitants in 2008 to 41.5 percent in 2009. However, they confirm “a slow but steady decline” in assistance at Mass in the country’s 44 dioceses over the last decade, a THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org Church an decline that is as high as 9.2 percent in certain regions. Fr. Witold Zdaniewicz, director of the Polish Institute of Statistics, has specified that between 43 percent and 46 percent of Polish Catholics went to church regularly during the period from 1991–2007, adding that if he guesses right the present tendency to drop will continue. “Observing the studies made over the last thirty years, we must give in to the evidence: fewer and fewer people go to church,” Fr. Wojciech Sadlon, of the Institute of Statistics of the Catholic Church, told the agency ENI. On May 13, in a press conference at the Secretariat of the Polish Bishops’ Conference, Fr. Sadlon mentioned to the Polish Catholic press agency KAI that the sociologists of religions have identifi ed several causes explaining the decline in the frequenting of churches, especially the cultural and social changes, as well as the problems in the Church’s pastoral work. He emphasized that Polish religiosity remains mostly rooted in the countryside and less in the cities, adding however that the “pessimistic outlook” of a sudden drop in the frequenting of churches has not yet been confirmed. This observation follows that of the drop in priestly and monastic vocations in this country, which is for the most part Catholic. By the end of 2009, 687 Poles had entered the seminary, that is, 5 percent less than in 2008. In 2000, Poland had 4,773 seminarians, compared to 3,732 in 2009. The number of women wishing to enter into religious orders has dropped by half in 10 years; only 300 of them began studies in the prenovitiate in 2009, compared to 723 a decade earlier. During the year, 28 convents closed down. A logical consequence of the diminution of the number of candidates to the priesthood in Poland, is that the Polish Catholic Church will send fewer priests abroad in the future, declared Msgr. Jozef Henryk Muszynski, Primate Emeritus of Poland, on June 7 to the press agency KNA. At present, a quarter of European seminaries are Polish. (Source: DICI) Turkey: Murder of the Apostolic Vicar of Anatolia The President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Turkey, Bishop Luigi Padovese, aged 63, was murdered with a knife on Thursday, June 3, 2010, by his driver. Within 24 hours the latter, aged 26, had been arrested and imprisoned after confessing to the crime. The Italian prelate, who was also the Apostolic Vicar of Anatolia, was in [the yard of] his summer house located on the outskirts of Iskenderun in southern Turkey when he was discovered lifeless. Although the first official version described it as an isolated act by a mentally deranged man who had converted four years ago to Catholicism, several subsequent revelations quickly called that version of the facts into question. After being stabbed repeatedly, Bishop Padovese is said to have succeeded in going outdoors to call for help before being decapitated—an act that is strongly reminiscent of Muslim ritual sacrifice. According to witnesses quoted by AsiaNews agency, the murderer afterward shouted from the rooftop, “I killed the great Satan! Allah Akbar [God is great]!” The day after the assassination, while meeting with journalists on the airplane that was taking him to Cyprus, Benedict XVI expressed the hope that this murder would not be attributed to “Turkey or the Turkish people....What is certain is that it and World Official Letter from the District of South America on the Legalization of “Homosexual Marriage” in Argentina Letter from Fr. Christian Bouchacourt to the priests of the District of South America of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X, on the passage of a law authorizing “homosexual marriage” in Argentina on July 15, 2010. (Official Translation FSSPX – MG) + Martinez, 15 de julio de 2010 Fraternidad Sacerdotal San Pio X Distrito América del Sur El Superior Estimados Padres, This 15th of July 2010 is a day of mourning and of great sorrow for Argentina. Indeed, in approving the bill in favor of “homosexual marriage”, the senators and all those who voted in favor of the bill have committed a grave sin of impiety towards God that comes back to the whole nation that they are supposed to represent. The Argentinian episcopate carries a heavy responsibility as well in this grave defeat. Desiring to please the world, and to give up denouncing error and proclaiming the truth, the bishops have become inaudible and have let the wolves into the flock. Why did they not launch a Crusade of Masses, prayers and sacrifices as a barrage against this abomination? May God have mercy on them. They will have to answer to Him for their suicidal failure to take responsibility. In reaction to this insult to God, I ask that a Mass of reparation be celebrated in each of our priories in Argentina and all our missions in which it is possible. We will say the votive Mass “pro remissione peccatorum”. May our faithful assist in great numbers at these Masses and may they receive communion to implore God to have mercy on Argentina and turn away His anger from our nation. May Our Lady of Lujan have mercy on us and save Argentina. Parce Domine, parce populo tuo. Padre Christian BOUCHACOURT (Source: DICI, No. 219, July 24, 2010) was not a religious or political assassination; it was a personal issue,” the Pope insisted, while admitting that he had “very little information about the facts” of the case. “We are still waiting for a full explanation of events,” he added, “but we do not want this tragic situation to become mixed up with the dialogue with Islam.” However, what is still the unofficial version of the facts, corroborated by the newspaper investigation made for AsiaNews, seems to contradict the explanation given by the Holy Father. For Archbishop Ruggero Franceschini of Smyrna, temporary successor to Bishop Padovese, there is almost no doubt: the motives for this assassination 39 can only be of a religious nature. On June 12, in an interview granted to the Italian daily Il Foglio, the cleric who celebrated Bishop Padovese’s funeral in Turkey judged in particular that Benedict XVI had received “bad counsel” before speaking about this sensitive subject. In the Vatican as well, Benedict XVI’s conclusions seemed puzzling. A high-ranking prelate, contacted by the (press) agency I.Media on the 9th of last June, clearly stated that the Pope would have done better not to intervene so early on this delicate question. He also confided that Bishop Padovese’s chauffeur, whom he had had the opportunity to meet, was far from being “the mental case” immediately portrayed by the Turkish authorities, nor even a convert to Christianity! Lastly, this ecclesiastic recalled that in the Islamic religion, decapitation was reserved for “sheep and infidels.” Another Roman priest, also quoted by I.Media, confided that it is “at the very least strange that all murderers of Christians in Turkey are presented as mad.” He further noted that Bishop Padovese’s chauffeur was “of too weak a constitution to attack the Bishop alone,” the Bishop being a particularly “sturdy” man. Finally, this contact in the Vatican indicated that the Italian prelate apparently confided that he had received several death threats. Another element corroborates the hypothesis of a religious motive for the crime. According to Father Filippo di Giacomo, an Italian priest and well-known Vatican specialist, Bishop Padovese was scheduled to leave for Cyprus in order to participate in the Sovereign Pontiff’s visit there. But he supposedly cancelled this project because he feared for his safety and …that of the Pope! Indeed, Turkwww.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 40 Church and World ish government sources are said to have warned him that his chauffeur was an Islamic fundamentalist infiltrator. Again according to Father di Giacomo, cited by the Spanish daily El Pais in its June 9th edition, the president of the Conference of Catholic Bishops of Turkey was particularly fearful that his chauffeur might try to assassinate the Pope. This dark story is unfortunately not the first in Turkey. In the last four years, several Christian religious have been attacked. In February 2006, a priest, also Italian, Andrea Santoro, was assassinated with bullets in the city of Trabzon, in the northeastern region of the country. His young assailant, 16 years of age, was condemned to a prison term of nearly 19 years. In 2007, a priest of Izmir, Adriano Franchini, was slightly wounded in the stomach by a young man of 19 at the end of Sunday Mass. In the same year, a “commando” burst into the publishing house where Bibles were being printed, in Malatya, Anatolia, and killed three Christians, one of whom was a German missionary. The five attackers who cut the throats of their victims are soon to be sentenced. In this situation, particularly tense for Christians who represent less than one percent of the Turkish population, out of 72 million inhabitants, Benedict XVI hailed in a message read on the 14th of June, on the occasion of the funeral of the assassinated prelate in Milan, “the resolute commitment for dialogue and reconciliation that characterized the priestly life and episcopal ministry” of Bishop Luigi Padovese. (Source: DICI) THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org Italy: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in the Bookstores T wo books have appeared in Italy that make known to readers the life and work of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. A translation of the work Priestly Sanctity, published in 2008 by Clovis, is being published by the well-known Milanese editor Marietti under the title Santità e Sacerdozio. A translation of the work The Mass of All Time, published by Clovis in 2005 [available from Angelus Press], should likewise be edited by Marietti towards the end of this year. Sugarco Editions, in Milan, which last year published journalists Alessandro Gnocchi’s and Mario Palmaro’s book Tradizione, il vero volto (The true face of Tradition), dedicated to the “heirs of Archbishop Lefebvre,” published a biography of the founder of Ecône: Mons. Marcel Lefebvre, nel nome della Verità (Bishop Lefebvre, in the name of Truth). Its author, Cristina Siccardi, shows that he whom one was pleased to call “the rebel bishop” has in reality shown us that “it is in Tradition, in the Catholic doctrine, in the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass of all time, and in priestly sanctity that the answers can be found to the problems of a world lost to pride and consumed with vainglory.” Austria: Bishops Claim That the Vatican Should Debate Celibacy Assembled for a three-day congress around Ascension Thursday, the Austrian bishops opined that the Vatican should allow a debate on priestly celibacy. As cited by the French Press Agency (AFP), the Ordinary of Carinthia in the southern part of the country, Bishop Alois Schwarz, declared that “As bishops we hear talk about it and we are telling Rome that we have this problem.” He also underscored that this debate should not be ignored but rather “amplified” in the Catholic Church throughout the world. Without explicitly mentioning the pedophilia scandals that are spattering the Church, the Austrian bishops called during their meeting for “major reforms” within the Church, in particular emphasizing the need to speak about the role of women. Several days earlier, in an interview with the daily Die Presse, the Ordinary of Eisenstadt, Bishop Paul Iby, had said that he was in favor of abolishing priestly celibacy “so as to deal with the lack of vocations.” (Source: DICI) Italy: The Holy Shroud of Turin Venerated by More Than Two Million Pilgrims The exposition of the Holy Shroud in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin has drawn more than 2.1 million pilgrims since April 10, 2010. Most of the pilgrims have come from Italy, with 130,000 others from neighboring countries, continued on p. 42 F R . p e t e r R . s c o t t QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Does alcoholism deprive one of the use of free will? Innumerable are the writings on alcoholism, and nearly as numerous are the explanations of the etiology of this disorder. The concern here is about the very particular question of the complex relationship between alcoholism and free will, upon which depends our understanding of the impact of alcoholism on the spiritual life, and the spiritual life on alcoholism. Professionals who deal with alcoholics on a regular basis all agree that alcoholism is a disease, and a disease that runs in families. But what kind of disease is it? Either it would seem to be a physical and hereditary disorder, over which a man has no control, or it would seem that it is a disorder that a man brings upon himself by his substance abuse, so that it is consequently voluntary and willful, both in its roots and in a man‘s refusal to overcome it. The first explanation denies free will, the second places it fairly and squarely in the domain of free will. There are tenants of both positions. However, both explanations, one denying the alcoholic’s free will, and the other attributing the disorder precisely to his free will, are both far too simplistic to account for the reality. A Personality Disorder In fact, alcoholism is a psychological disease, but not such as to destroy free will nor one that is untreatable, but one which can be overcome by heroic acts of free will. It is a psychological disease because it is not simply the fact of drinking to excess, whether it be binge drinking or regular drinking, whether it be intoxication or a more controlled abuse. There are plenty of non-alcoholics who drink to excess. It is an entirely deliberate act. They choose to do so without any compulsion. Their personalities undergo no substantial change when they drink, other than the symptoms of intoxication. Entirely different is the alcoholic, who typically becomes quite a different person when he drinks: such as violent, abusive, depressive, anxious, antisocial, reclusive–in a word, quite selfcentered. This change reveals the fundamental weakness of character of the alcoholic. Although frequently highly intelligent and successful, considerate and kind, gregarious and friendly, he lacks self-confidence, does not believe in himself, is sensitive to the extreme, is frequently paranoid and paralyzed by human respect. It is this particular weakness, from which he sees no way out, that drives him to escape from reality by the use of alcohol. It is consequently a compulsion, and not a choice of deliberate free will. 41 In this regard, alcoholism is similar to the other neuroses, and different from psychoses, such as schizophrenia, which is of a physical nature and does destroy free will and also both culpability and the ability to gain merits. The psychotic is out of contact with reality and cannot direct human acts to their goal, the greater glory of God and the observance of the commandments. Not so, the neurotic. He can understand the disorder of his anxiety or depression or phobia, but feels unable to correct it, at least directly. Likewise with alcoholism. The alcoholic can understand the disorder of his excessive alcohol intake, and even that of his character weakness, but he still frequently feels unable to do anything about it. This in turns leads to the sense of hopelessness and the tendency to flee from reality by drinking. It is for this reason that he seems incapable of self-will, of making a serious decision to stop drinking, which is what the friends and relatives find so frustrating in dealing with the alcoholic. It is not that, absolutely speaking, he lacks the will power, but that the compulsion makes it very difficult for him to exercise it. Egocentricity However, there is another and fundamental underlying characteristic of the neurotic personality, that is typically characteristic of the alcoholic. There is in him a non-deliberate, but structured, egocentricity, that is an organized, determined preoccupation with his own self, which is at the root of his disease. It is not the deliberate and willful egocentricity of the selfish person, but one produced by previous events, over which he has no choice. This is what Dr. Rudolf Allers, the famous Catholic Austrian psychiatrist had to say about this underlying characteristic of the neurotic: He is filled with an incessant concern for his own ego which seems to him in constant peril. Thus we find an obvious, if more or less successfully disguised, egocentricity as a further essential component of the neurotic character. The neurotic is like a man gazing into a small hand mirror which reflects his own features, but excludes the outside world. (Practical Psychology in Character Development [Roman Catholic Books], p. 164) It is difficult for a normal person to understand such a structured egocentricity. We know that when we become preoccupied with ourselves, we are deliberately selfish, and we can do something about it. For the alcoholic, the egocentricity is a structure in his way of thinking which has become deeply rooted by past experiences: whether it be the example of an alcoholic parent, whether it be some kind of abuse or lack of affection or positive reinforcement in early childhood www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 42 years. The reason does not matter. The alcoholic always thinks in terms of himself because he is always dealing with his false and artificial sense of inadequacy and inferiority. Many such persons can be fervent and devout in their spiritual life, but unable to break out of the vicious cycle, flipping back into their vice in an apparently irrational and unexplainable manner. Remedies What, then, can be done for the alcoholic? A purely spiritual plan of action–Mass and the sacraments and prayers–usually does not work. This is not because of a lack of free will, although it looks like it to the outsider. It is because of a failure to understand the real nature of the disorder, which is not spiritual but psychological. How many spiritual men, and even pious priests, are afflicted by this disorder and feel unable to rise above it! A psychological plan of action is essential. Treatment programs and alcoholics anonymous have as their goal to put into practice such a plan of action on the natural level, to enable the alcoholic to escape from the irrational compulsion. They do not deny the existence of free will, but to the contrary strive to captivate and direct it by natural means. First of all they will lead a man to acknowledge that he has this disease, that he will have it for life, namely that he will always be a recovering alcoholic. Thus the first major problem of denial is overcome. Then they will lead the alcoholic to escape from his sense of inadequacy by encouraging him to depend, not upon himself, but upon a higher power, which we call God. Regular meetings, emotional support, and the companionship of those who suffer in the same way as he does frequently make it possible for the alcoholic to rise above the sense of inadequacy and the compulsion to drink. We cannot approve of the naturalism and spirit of religious indifference that characterize Alcoholics Anonymous, yet these natural methods are necessary means, and enable free will to start to take control. However, such a recovering alcoholic is still left with his character weakness, with his structured egocentricity, on account of which he can always fall back into the same vice. For this there can be only one answer, and it is a supernatural one: it is the heroic love of the Cross, it is the wholeheartedly embracing of the Gospel teaching: “If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross, and follow me. For he who would save his life will lose it; but he who loses his life for my sake will find it” (Mt. 16:24-25). The alcoholic who is willing to deny himself completely, as Matt Talbot did, and to heroically give up all consideration of his own reputation, honor, importance, by that very fact neutralizes his sense of inadequacy. His character, now strong, is no longer alcoholic. I know a pious and good priest, a long-time alcoholic, who received the will power to overcome his alcoholism only when he consecrated himself totally to the Sacred Heart, that is, when he gave himself up totally. However, let nobody be mistaken. Grace builds upon nature, and without the prior overcoming of the natural tendencies to deny the existence of a problem and to be preoccupied by his sense of his own inadequacy, such supernatural generosity is not possible. Consequently, the disease of alcoholism certainly does not, simply speaking, abolish the use of free will. It does, however, constitute a grave obstacle to self-control through the egocentricity that it creates, and it is only by free will, by the deliberate use of a combination of natural and supernatural means, that a man can attain to consistency, wholeness and integrity of character. Fr. Peter Scott was ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988. After assignments as seminary professor, U.S. 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. Church and World especially from France, Cardinal Severino Poletto, Archbishop of Turin, noted in a press conference on May 22. “This event has revived the faith at a moment of spiritual confusion and muddle,” the Cardinal declared. “I am very happy about the arrival of more than two million pilgrims, but also about their spiritual participation, which is much THE ANGELUS • September 2010 www.angeluspress.org continued from p. 40 more recollected than ten years ago during the exposition in 2000.” He mentioned also Sunday, May 2, the day of the pastoral visit of Pope Benedict XVI to Turin, the Mass on the Piazza San Carlo for a congregation of 25,000 (with another 25,000 attending the Mass through giant television screens installed for the occasion) and the Holy Father’s meeting with young people. The exposition ended on Sunday, May 23, at 2:00 p.m. Cardinal Poletto celebrated a Solemn Mass preceded by the reading of a letter from the Pope, and he announced that the next public expositions of the Shroud would be of more limited duration because of the risks that the cloth might deteriorate. (Source: DICI) TheLastWord 43 Msgr. Brunero Gherardini Criticism from Rome on Vatican II In my effort to establish a synthesis of the positions defended by Bishop Lefebvre in favor of Tradition, and without pretending to treat exhaustively of the subject, it seems to me that the conflict establishes itself as follows: 1. A priestly formation that founds its principles on ecclesiastical Tradition and in the supernatural values of divine Revelation, confronting a priestly formation open to the fluctuating horizon of a culture in a perpetual state of becoming. 2. A liturgy that certainly has a strong point in the Mass called traditional, confronting an anthropocentric and sociological liturgy [that of the Novus Ordo Mass], in which the collective prevails over the value of the individual, prayer ignores the latreutic aspect, the assembly becomes the principal actor and God gives way to man. 3. A liberty that makes one’s “liberation” depend on the Decalogue, the commandments of the Church, the obligations of duty of state, and the duty to know, love and serve God, confronting a liberty that puts all forms of worship on an equal footing, is silent about the law of God, sets the individual and society free in the ethical and religious domains, and leaves the solution of all problems to the conscience alone. 4. A theology that gathers its contents from specific sources (Revelation, Magisterium, Patristics, Liturgy), confronting a theology that opens its arms wide, day after day, to the cultural emergences of the moment, even to those that clearly contradict the sources just mentioned. 5. A soteriology [study of the work of salvation–Ed.] closely united to the person and redemptive work of the Incarnate Word, to the action of the Holy Ghost, closely linked to the application of the merits of the Redeemer, to the sacramental intervention of the Church and to the cooperation of the baptized faithful, confronting a soteriology that regards the unity of the human race as a consequence of the incarnation of the Word, in whom (cf. Gaudium et Spes 22) each man finds his own identification. 6. An ecclesiology that identifies the Church with the Mystical Body of Christ and recognizes in His sacramental presence the vital secret of ecclesiastic being and action, confronting an ecclesiology that considers the Catholic Church as one component among others of the Church of Christ, and that, in this phantom-like Church of Christ, lulls to sleep the missionary spirit, dialogues but does not evangelize, and above all renounces proselytism as if it were a mortal sin. 7. An expiatory Sacrifice of the Mass that celebrates the mysteries of the passion, death and resurrection of Christ, sacramentally representing the satisfactory redemption, confronting a Mass in which the priest is only a president and everyone takes an “active” part in the sacrament, thanks to the fact that the faith is not founded on God Who reveals Himself, but is an existential response made to God Who interpolates us. 8. A Magisterium con­s cious of having the charge of guarding the sacred deposit of divine Revelation with the duty to interpret and transmit it to future generations, confronting a papal Magisterium that, far from feeling itself to be the voice of the teaching Church, subjects the Church herself to the college of bishops, endowed with the same rights and duties as the Roman Pontiff. 9. A religiosity that realizes the common vocation to the service of God and, out of love for Him, the service of one’s brothers in humanity, confronting a religiosity that reverses this natural order, makes man its center and, at least in practice if not in theory, substitutes him for God. I will not enter into the details of the relations and difficulties between the Holy See and the Society of Saint Pius X. I stick to the common theme of Tradition and I observe that “safeguard the faith and combat error” should be the ideal and commitment as much of the Church as of her sons. In the light of this, it is difficult for me to understand how the reproach of an “incomplete and contradictory Tradition” formulated by John Paul II in 1988, could have any real grounds. What I understand is that it has nothing to do with the “spirit of Assisi.” Translated from the Italian. DICI, July 12, 2010. Msgr. Brunero Gherardini gave these remarks in the review Quod et tradidi vobis. Brunero Gherardini, a renowned, 85-year-old theologian of the Roman school, is a canon of St. Peter’s Basilica, secretary for the Pontifical Academy of Theology, professor emeritus at the Pontifical Lateran University, and editor of Divinitas magazine. www.angeluspress.org THE ANGELUS • September 2010 New from An ewbook N dio Au OPEN LETTER to CONFUSED CATHOLICS What our customers are saying... “My listening experience with Angelus Press’s latest audiobook was one of profound awakening and spiritual consolation. Never before have I listened so intently to an audio production.” “Since listening to this audiobook, my perspective on the fundamental truths of the Catholic Faith has been forever strengthened.” “Incredible. After listening to these CDs, I felt like I was able to personally connect with the mind of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.” Visit angeluspress.org to hear a sample Six CD’s (over 6½ hours). STK# 8477 $29.95 “What touched me most was the firm balance Archbishop Lefebvre possessed in his views on the Faith.” “One notices how the narrator does an exquisite job of captivating his audience.” Essential listening for Catholics everywhere. The definitive introduction to the 20th century’s crisis in the Catholic Church. Catechism of the Crisis in the Church Is there a crisis in the Church today? Fr. Matthias Gaudron One would have to close one’s eyes not to see that the Catholic Church is suffering a grave crisis. In the 1960’s, at the time of the Second Vatican Council, there were hopes for a new springtime in the Church; exactly the opposite has come to pass. Thousands of priests have abandoned their office, and thousands of monks and religious have returned to secular life. There are very few vocations in Europe and not many in North America either; countless seminaries, convents, and religious houses have closed their doors. Many parishes lack priests, and religious congregations are obliged to abandon schools, hospitals, and homes for the aged. As Pope Paul VI lamented on June 29, 1972: “Through some crack, the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.” 248pp. Softcover. STK# 8471✱ $16.95 www.angeluspress.org ● 1-8 00-9 6 6-73 37 Please visit our website to see our entire selection of books and music. Angelus Press RS . A Life of Christ for Children As told by a grandmother Mme. La Comtesse de Ségur The life of Christ is fundamental to the Catholic Faith. This book, written with children in mind, lays the groundwork for a lifetime of learning about the Gospels. In this famous edition, a grandmother relays the stories of Jesus and His time on earth in a simple but profound manner. “The sunlight streams in on expectant faces, on golden curls, brown hair, and Grandma's white head. The canary sings his loudest while the children scramble for the places at Grandma's right and left. Finally all are seated, and Grandma, seated in her big armchair, begins The Story of Christ....” 352pp. Softcover. STK# 8472✱ $14.95 Television: The Soul at Risk What should we think? Isabelle Doré Television. There are few technological inventions that have had such universal impact in the past century. But what should we think about this phenomenon, especially from a Catholic perspective? A brief study such as this helps demonstrate that, indeed, it is something which puts “the soul at risk.” Sooner or later, we all have to make choices: Television in the home or not? Moderate use or not? Grudging toleration or opposition with all one’s might? The best thing to do in making a choice is to consider all the aspects of television and audiovisual media in general. Movies, videos, and DVDs are in various ways both alike and different from TV. How does television affect the intellect’s capacity to apprehend what is true? How does television affect the will’s capacity to love what is good? These questions and more are answered inside. 80pp. Softcover. STK# 8470✱ $8.95 Living the Little Office Reflections on the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary Sr. Marianna Gildea, R.S.M The Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary is one of the liturgical treasures of the Catholic Church. With a history of over one thousand years, it has been prayed by clerics and faithful alike. Living the Little Office provides a guide, explanation, and aid to understanding and praying the Little Office. This book is intended primarily for those who want a simple explanation of the Psalms along with practical meditations. It follows the order of the Office itself and guides one through the prayers as they are prayed. The Scriptural commentary is thorough, yet not overwhelming. Let Living the Little Office lead you to a more profound devotion to Our Lady and adoration of the Divine Majesty. 177pp. Softcover. STK# 8469✱ $12.95 Newest Distributed Titles Spiritual Conferences Fr. Frederick Faber Fr. Faber was one of the giants of 19th-century English Catholicism. A convert from Anglicanism, he was best known for his powerful sermons. During Advents, Lents, and Months of Mary, Fr. Faber would preach on matters of the spiritual life. These spiritual conferences, as he called them, were honed to perfection for this collection, which became one of his most popular books. 345pp. Softcover. STK# 8473✱ $19.95 The Life of St. Francis of Assisi St. Bonaventure “Francis, go and build up My house, which thou seest, is falling into ruin.” To fulfill this command of Our Lord, St. Francis of Assisi (1181-1226) began by restoring physical churches and continued by building up the spiritual Church in souls. Francis’ humility, purity, and true joy inspired many to conversion and a deeper faith. Never ordained a priest, St. Francis nonetheless was a preacher and a miracle-worker of the first order–curing, prophesying, casting out devils, turning water into wine, and raising people from the dead. The Life of St. Francis of Assisi by St. Bonaventure conveys a picture of the Saint that renders an indelible impression of a man totally transformed by God. 165pp. Softcover. STK# 8474✱ $14.95 By What Authority Robert Hugh Benson Sir Nicholas is the rock-solid head of his household and a devout Catholic who helps renegade priests hide from Her Majesty’s men; but across the way lives a Protestant minister with a suspicious eye. The reader will find himself traveling across the English countryside hunting for priests; the next minute witnessing the happenings at the Queen’s court. In the midst of all this exists the relationship between a young man and a young lady; one a Catholic, the other a Protestant. During the Protestant Reformation, Catholic families suffered persecutions of various types. Families were divided; fathers and sons were thrown into jail; priests were hunted down and killed; neighbor turned against neighbor. But through it all, the few priests that remained were able to sustain and convert many. The tale told in this book is one of suspense, deceit, loyalty, martyrdom, truth and conversion. 558pp. Hardcover. STK# 8475 $22.00 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.