Marian Apparitions
Quito Apparition
Medjugorje: Facts, Judgments
and Problems
Catechism on Private
Revelation
March - April 2019

“I will put enmities between thee and the
woman, and thy seed and her seed: she
shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie
in wait for her heel” (Gen. 3:13-15). This
translation, found also in many older
editions of the Latin Vulgate, is the basis for
common depictions in Catholic art of Mary
with a serpent beneath her feet.

Letter
from the
Publisher
Dear Reader,
Lourdes, La Salette, Fatima, Akita. Such names resound deeply in the souls of many
good Christians today. There has been a recrudescence of interest in the 19th and 20th
century apparitions ever since the turning point of Vatican II. Why is this? People readily
invoke the lack of spirituality coming from modern pulpits and ever-changing ceremonies.
The normal channels of grace and doctrine suffer from on-going paralysis or are given a
charismatic twist. Left thirsty for the divine, spiritual and miraculous, many people have
gone to the desert to feed on what manna they could find.
Archbishop Lefebvre was very much aware of it but he was not totally at ease with such
enthusiasm. How often did he not complain of the fever of “apparitionitis”! Being the missionary that he was, he made sure that his hearers were given sound doctrine and solid
moral principles. With all this, they would be able to withstand the heat or cold of the spiritual desert around them.
Almost weekly, some seer was sending him encouragement, warning or advice for his
future projects. And, invariably, his answer was that he was following divine Providence
and God would let him know the way through the proper channels. “Test the spirits” was
certainly his motto when it came to preternatural revelations or miraculous events. As a
Church prelate and judge appointed by God over the flock, he could not afford naïvete in
accepting messages of a private nature at face value.
The greater the stakes and the seriousness of the message, the more cautious and thorough should the inquiry of the legitimate authorities be. And, so long as both the local and
Roman authorities are limping in bringing up a proper judgment on the latest message of
the latest seer, it may be a wise method to take things with some reserve and a grain of salt
which was taught to us by the example of our dear Founder.
In this issue, old as well as recent Marian apparitions will unfold their secrets under your
eyes including Our Lady of Good Success, Medjugorje and La Salette. Each of which raised
much interest, caution and certainly some questions along the way. They are speaking for
themselves along with various artistic tokens of love for God’s mother. As you are reading
these stories, our greatest hope is that they will help you to learn and appreciate the mind
of the Church on Marian apparitions. She always needs to test the spirits and apply the
principles of discernment to the matter at hand. This is probably the best way to serve Our
Blessed Mother and defend her inexpugnable privileges.

Fr. Jürgen Wegner
Publisher

March - April 2019
Volume XLII, Number 2
Publisher
Fr. Jürgen Wegner
Editor-in-Chief
Mr. James Vogel
Managing Editor
Fr. Dominique Bourmaud
Assistant Editor
Mr. Gabriel Sanchez
Copy Editor
Miss Jane Carver
Design and Layout
credo.creatie
(Eindhoven, The Netherlands)
Mr. Simon Townshend
Director of Operations
Mr. Brent Klaske

		
U.S.
Foreign Countries

Subscription Rates
1 year 2 years
3 years
$45.00 $85.00 $120.00
$65.00 $125.00 $180.00

(inc. Canada and Mexico)

All payments must be in U.S. funds only.
Online subscriptions: $20.00/year. To subscribe visit:
www.angelusonline.org. Register for free to access
back issues 14 months and older. All subscribers to the print
version of the magazine have full access to the online version.

Contents
Letter from the Publisher

4

Theme: Marian Apparitions
––The Quito Apparition
––Medjugorje: Facts, Judgments and Problems
––Picturing Our Lady: Richard Crashaw’s “The Tear”
––Catechism on Private Revelation
––A Debate on the Mountain: Our Lady of La Salette

6
10
15
19
23

Spirituality
––The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: The Collect
––Fairy Tales
––The First Masses in Australia at Botany Bay
––Build Me a Temple

32
37
41
46

Christian Culture
––A Marian Catechism in Music: The Ave Maria by
Josquin Desprez
––Eastern Marian Apparitions, “Orthodoxy” and the West
––The Family Meal
––Notre-Dame de la Garde
––Questions and Answers

48
54
58
62
68

“Instaurare omnia in Christo”

The Angelus (ISSN 10735003) is published bi-monthly
under the patronage of St. Pius X and Mary,
Queen of Angels. Publication office is located at
PO Box 217, St. Marys, KS 66536.
PH (816) 753-3150; FAX (816) 753-3557.
Periodicals Postage Rates paid at Kansas City, MO.
Manuscripts and letters to the editor are welcome
and will be used at the discretion of the editors.
The authors of the articles presented here are solely
responsible for their judgments and opinions.
Postmaster sends address changes to the address above.
©2019 BY ANGELUS PRESS. OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE
PRIESTLY SOCIETY OF SAINT PIUS X FOR THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA

News from Tradition
––Church and World
––The 20th Century Herald, Jacques Maritain
––The Last Word

72
78
87

Theme Marian Apparitions

The Quito
Apparition
By Fr. Paul Kimball and Renée Godinez

In a very remote country never mentioned
in the news, Our Lady appeared centuries ago
to a humble convent. Naturally speaking, there
is nothing which would prompt anyone to take
off the heavy dust covering the story of its
events. And, yet, they made their way into the
Consecration sermon of Archbishop Lefebvre. It
certainly has the hallmark of a genuine apparition
with true prophecies dealing with our own day.
This is certainly the reason why lately, there has
been an accrued recognition of these events and
what they portend in our traditional circles.

The Consecration Sermon
On June 30, 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre, as he
was making his apologia for the Consecration
which he called “Operation Survival of Tradition,”
6

The Angelus

March - April 2019

made reference to several private apparitions,
Leo XIII’s vision which prompted his exorcism,
La Salette’s warning of an eclipse, and also a long
reference to Our Lady of Quito. Here are his own
words:
“It was not only the good Pope Leo XIII who
said these things, but Our Lady prophesied them
as well. Just recently, the priest who takes care
of the priory of Bogota, Colombia, brought me a
book concerning the apparition of Our Lady of
Good Success—Buen Suceso—of Quito, Ecuador,
to a nun shortly after the Council of Trent, so you
see, quite a few centuries ago... And Our Lady
prophesied, saying explicitly that during the 19th
century and most of the 20th century, errors
would become more and more widespread in
Holy Mother Church, placing her in a catastrophic
situation. Morals would become corrupt and the

Faith would disappear. It seems impossible not to
see it happening today. I apologize for continuing
this account of the apparition but she speaks of
a prelate who will absolutely oppose this wave of
apostasy and impiety—saving the priesthood by
forming good priests. I do not say that prophecy
refers to me; you may draw your own conclusions.
I was stupefied when reading these lines but I
cannot deny them, since they are recorded and
deposited in the archives of this apparition.”

The History Behind

In the early 17th century, the Blessed
Virgin Mary appeared on several occasions
to a Spanish Conceptionist sister, Mother
Marianna de Jesus Torres, at the convent in
Quito, Ecuador. On her first visit (January 16,
1599), Our Lady directed Mother Marianna
to commission a life-sized statue of herself
holding the Infant Jesus under the title “Maria
of Buen Suceso of the Purification.” The title
of Our Lady of Good Success is certainly the
name with which most faithful are familiar.
Given the growing popularity of the devotion,
the Franciscan Conceptionist Sisters of the
Convent of the Immaculate Conception have
issued a clarification of this name requesting
faithful and pious apostolates to refer to her
as Maria of Buen Suceso of the Purification.
This is done to keep the emphasis on the
Purification and to avoid the idea that good
success is similar to good luck as the Spanish
clearly does not translate in this sense.
The statue was begun by a local sculptor,
but was miraculously completed in 1611 by St.
Francis of Assisi and the entire celestial court.
Our Lady also prophesied about many important
matters that pertain explicitly to our modern
times. Our Lady revealed much to Mother
Marianna about our current situation, including:
–– The sacrament of Extreme Unction will be little
esteemed and many will die without receiving
it.
–– The sacrament of Matrimony will be attacked
and iniquitous laws will make it easy to live in
sin.
–– There will be an almost total and general
corruption of customs.

–– Innocence will almost no longer be found in
children, nor modesty in women.
–– The effects of secular education will be one
reason for the lack of priestly and religious
vocations.
–– The sacred sacrament of Holy Orders will be
ridiculed, oppressed, and despised.
–– Corrupted priests, who will scandalize the
Christian people, will incite the hatred of the
enemies of the Catholic Church to fall upon all
priests.
–– This apparent triumph of Satan will bring
enormous sufferings to the good pastors of the
Church.
–– In this supreme moment of need of the Church,
those who should speak will fall silent.
Our Lady said that the message of the
apparitions would only become widely known
in our days. And she linked the spread of
this devotion in our times to her miraculous
intervention for the restoration of the Catholic
Church, precisely “when almost all would seem
lost and paralyzed.” Thus, even though Our Lady’s
message is severe, it is also one of great hope.
For she promised to succor those who invoke her
under this name during these turbulent times.
The revelations of Maria of Buen Suceso
and devotion to her miraculous statue were
approved by Bishop Salvador de Ribera in 1611
and subsequent bishops up to our times. In 1906,
while remodeling the convent, Mother Marianna’s
sarcophagus was opened and her body was
discovered whole and incorrupt. On February 2,
1991, with approval from Rome, the Archdiocese
of Quito performed a canonical coronation of
Maria of Buen Suceso of the Purification as
“Queen of Quito.”
In the year 1941, Peru had invaded Ecuadorian
territory. In the face of this emergency, the
Archbishop of Quito ordered triduums, or three
days of prayers, in different churches, to be
prayed in honor of various titles of the Blessed
Virgin, imploring the cessation of hostilities.
On July 24, the triduum in honor of Maria
of Buen Suceso began in the Church of the
Immaculate Conception. Three days later, on
Sunday, July 27, 1941, from six o’clock in the
morning until three o’clock in the afternoon of
7

Theme Marian Apparitions
July 28, that is, during a 20 hour span, the statue
of Our Lady of Buen Suceso moved its eyes.
This miracle was observed by approximately
30,000 people, who poured into the church to
contemplate the wonder. Her face changed
alternately from a reddish tone to another tone
similar to marble. Her eyes, which normally
look downwards, rose up little by little during
the miracle until they remained looking towards
Heaven in a posture of supplication; then they
lowered towards the faithful, and alternated in
this way. That same afternoon of July 27, the
daily newspapers announced the cessation of
hostilities with Peru. The newspapers of the
following day described the miracle on the
front page, pushing the international events of
World War II and the Peruvian invasion into the
background.

A Pilgrim’s Narration
After months of planning, reading and
anticipation, you have finally arrived in Ecuador.

8

The Angelus

March - April 2019

Historic Quito is barely visible in the late night
arrival, but you feel the tranquility wrap around
you. A serenity settles over you like a warm
shawl. The cares of the world melt away. You
are finally free to focus on Her and absorb Her
messages.
I arose at four-thirty in the morning, quickly
dress and slip out the hotel by five o’clock. I
don’t know exactly where I’m going, but was
told by our host “just head up the hill; you’ll
find the church.” The church is unassuming—
yet magnificent. There were images on both
sides of the nave all the way to the altar. So
much to absorb at first glance. And next to the
communion rail was “the” statue of Our Lady
of Buen Suceso of the Purification. Little did I
realize that this was one of only three times each
year that the statue is so close you can almost
touch it. The remainder of the year it resides in
the cloistered convent chapel.
Then the banners came out. Four volunteers
were chosen to carry the litter with the smaller
replica statue, and we were ready to start our

morning procession. It’s still dark and Quito is
sleeping. A group of strangers assembled to unite
in prayer. Quito is at almost 10,000 ft. above sea
level and the city is quite hilly. This first day,
the morning rosary procession was deceivingly
easy. It was only a short path to another nearby
church. By the end of the rosary we were back
at the church of the Immaculate Conception.
The procession each morning to a different
church or convent increased in difficulty. We
were not only pushing our physical stamina up
the steep inclines, but also our motor skills by
singing our morning rosary while balancing
our pilgrimage prayer guides, rosary, and lit
candles. Nevertheless, every day brought its
own reward with the visit to another stunning
church or the warm welcome of a humble group
of sisters anxiously awaiting our arrival in their
convent courtyard. I suspected the sisters were
welcoming Her statue more than us pilgrims.
Mass was at 8 o’clock, so if I hurried back to the
hotel I could sneak in a quick nap. This was my
routine for nine mornings.
Following Mass and breakfast, we met for a
city tour at ten o’clock. Every day unfolds another
piece of Quito’s rich history. Afternoons were
on our own to explore, shop and enjoy the local
ambiance. At the height of the Catholic age, the
colonial city of Quito boasted over 200 churches.
In 1978, UNESCO declared the city a World
Heritage Site and brought in financial funding
to restore the major churches. The gold leaf is
copious and true to original design; original
artwork and statues are abundant. Entering a
restored church is a time travel back to the 16th
and 17th centuries when Catholic fervor was wellreflected in art. Outside, vendors and poverty
were everywhere. Walking the cobbled streets
with a priest in cassock brought those seeking a
blessing and alms.
There was an interior peace at Quito due to
the leaving behind of the daily news, personal
struggles and anxieties. The world melted away
from consciousness. Every day had a rhythm and
a focus outside of oneself. Being in the chapel
where Our Blessed Mother appeared to Mother
Marianna was humbling. Her messages for the
20th century rattled your bones and you could
see it all unfolding as foretold. The fact that Her

messages are for our generation made them more
poignant and personal. The evening talks given
by our priest were illuminating and thoughtful.
The final morning of the pilgrimage, February
2, was the Her long-anticipated feast day of the
Purification. The procession swelled to over 2,000
people with their own banners, songs and even
police mounted on horseback. Our group blended
into the sea of pilgrims proclaiming our Faith.
It was a glorious procession of confidence and
adoration!
After visiting other sites of Marian apparitions,
this pilgrimage would remain as one of the most
spiritually invigorating. Joining with a group
of like-minded Catholics, and led by a priest of
the SSPX, I gained a spiritual calm that carried
me for weeks. There were several priests and
religious of various orders that were available
for casual discussion and confession. This
pilgrimage was longer than a typical “visit” to
a Marian site. There was time to disconnect
from the world, absorb, reflect and connect
Her messages to our times. Every day was a
spiritual renewal and a history lesson. Every day
had structure and free time to pursue personal
interests. Evenings brought an inspirational talk
and camaraderie. What more could anyone ask?
As it is now drawing to a year since my
pilgrimage last January, I am digging deep
into my memories to draw upon the peace and
serenity that She imparted to me. Mary our
Mother always looks out for us and only wants
the best for us. She wants us to join her in
Heaven. She gave us messages for our present
times. She foresaw our foibles 400 years ago. Her
messages were unimaginable at the time, but so
real today.
If you are so moved and have the opportunity,
I highly recommend this pilgrimage. It’s like
nothing else you might experience. It is a
meditative retreat without imposed silence and
set in the preserved historical backdrop of the
time of the apparitions. The immense spirituality
of the experience settles into your very being,
and you appreciate the fullness of your Catholic
heritage. It’s a lesson in history, contemporary
life struggles, and the love of Our Mother for our
salvation.

9

Theme Marian Apparitions

Medjugorje
Facts, Judgments and Problems

by Fr. Pierre Duverger, SSPX

Summary of Facts
On June 24, 1981, six children in the town
of Medjugorje, Yugoslavia (today, BosniaHerzegovina), allegedly experienced apparitions
from the Blessed Virgin Mary. The apparition
conveyed a message of peace for the world, a
call to conversion, prayer and fasting. It also
entrusted the children with secret messages
about future events. The apparitions themselves
have continued almost daily since 1981, with
three of the now adult visionaries continuing to
experience them regularly. Originally occurring
on a hilltop near the town, they have since
occurred wherever the visionaries happen to be.
The news that Our Lady might be appearing
immediately began to attract pilgrims to
Medjugorje, first from the surrounding
10

The Angelus

March - April 2019

countryside, and then, despite the communist
government of that day, from Europe and
the whole world. These included clergy and
theologians, as well as experts from the physical
and medical sciences. The private judgment of
these early visitors did much to bolster people’s
belief in the events at Medjugorje. In addition,
some pilgrims reported seeing the sun spin
and being able to look at it without pain or eye
damage, others that their rosaries turned gold
colored. Others claimed that remarkable physical
or moral healings had taken place.

Ecclesiastical Judgments
Per the 1978 “Norms of the Sacred
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on

the Manner of Proceeding in Judging Presumed
Apparitions and Revelations,” the competent
authority to judge of the authenticity of
apparitions is the diocesan bishop. However, he
might decide that the matter needs more study
and would then refer it to the national bishops’
conference. The possible judgments are: constat
or non constat de supernaturalitate: it is
evident, or it is not evident, to be of supernatural
origin.

On Wednesday, June 24, 1981, the feast of St. John the
Baptist, six children between 12 and 20 years old were
walking on Mount Crnica (today called the Apparition Hill).
They say that they saw in the sky an evanescent figure of
a beautiful and luminous young woman with a child in her
arms. They say that they immediately understood that the
figure was the Virgin Mary.

declared: “What is happening at Medjugorje is
truly of God […]. It is certain that the pope is
interested in Medjugorje.” With these words
began the Roman support of the apparitions in
opposition to the Ordinary’s judgment.
In January 1984, Bishop Zanic published
a second warning, denouncing to the Italian
Bishops’ Conference then to the Yugoslav
Conference what was happening at Medjugorje.
In October he published, in Croatian and Italian,
his Posizione, denouncing the lies and exposing
the “charismatic magician” responsible for
manipulating the seers: Fr. Tomislav Vlasic.
In Rome, Cardinal Ratzinger and von
Balthasar answered with declarations in favor
of Medjugorje. Meanwhile, Archbishop Frane
Franic of Split-Makarska, publicly supported the
apparitions.
Despite Zanic’s legitimate complaints, Cardinal
Casaroli, Secretary of State and the pope himself
requested his silence. However, in November
1985, the intrepid bishop announced the diocesan
commission’s definitive report to be published in
May of the following year. In April, he submitted
it to the Prefect of the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger, who
ordered the dossier to be transferred to the
Congregation. The negative report would never
be published.

Diocesan Bishop vs. Rome

Bishops’ Conference
Commission

After an initial favorable response (hoping that
Our Lady was to put an end to the Herzegovina
case, 10-year resistance of the Franciscans to
the Holy See’s decree concerning the turning
over of the Medjugorje parish to the Diocese),
Bishop Pavao Zanic of Mostar, in whose diocese
Medjugorje is found, concluded as soon as 1982,
that the apparitions could not be authentic. He
denounced to Rome what he was thinking to be
a diabolical manifestation. Advised to go slowly,
he established a commission of theologians,
scientific experts and religious superiors to
investigate the events in 1982-1984 and again in
1984-1986 with additional members.
In October 1983, Hans Urs von Balthasar,

Since the events exceeded the scope of
the diocese, the then-Yugoslavian bishops’
conference was asked to complement the study
with additional research. A new commission
studied the events from 1987 to 1990. During
those years, Charismatic lobbyists and
the Vatican’s Ostpolitik worked in favor of
Medjugorje, apparitions which were in line with
the “Perestroika” and the new ecumenism in
vogue. In March 1990, Bishop Zanic published
another condemnation renewing his 1984
accusations. The Bishops’ Conference report was
eventually published in April 1991:
“…based on the research that has been done,
it is not possible to state that there were
11

Theme Marian Apparitions
apparitions or supernatural revelations.”
The contradiction appearing in the conclusion
will become the attitude adopted by Rome.
Meanwhile the supernatural nature of the
apparitions, messages and ecstasies was denied
and the pastoral care of the pilgrims was
recommended to the local bishop.

Same Condemnation,
Same Tolerance
Bishop Zanic’s successor, Bishop Ratko Perić,
appointed in 1993, condemned Medjugorje in his
1995 book Prijestolje Mudrosti (Seat of Wisdom).
Two years later, he re-stated his conviction that
the apparitions of Medjugorje are obviously not
supernatural.
Over the years, Rome adopted a more tolerant
position. The daily messages and the scandals
of the priests involved in Medjugorje brought
Cardinal Ratzinger to distance himself from
Medjugorje, declaring that neither he nor John
Paul II had ever recognized the apparitions as
authentic.
In March 2010, Benedict XVI established a
Roman commission to study the topic in further
detail.
In October 2013, the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith directed that clerics and
the faithful “are not permitted to participate in
meetings, conferences or public celebrations
during which the credibility of such ‘apparitions’
would be taken for granted.”
In January 2014, the Roman Commission
communicated its findings to the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith which had not
yet submitted its report to the pope for a final
decision.
In February 2017, Pope Francis named
Archbishop Hoser as a special envoy
to Medjugorje then later [May 2018] as Apostolic
Visitor to oversee the pastoral needs of both the
local parish and pilgrims.
On December 10, 2017 in Il Giornale,
Archbishop Hoser stated another contradictory
attitude: “While it is absolutely true that
pilgrimages to Medjugorje can be organized, they
must have nothing to do with the apparitions or
12

The Angelus

March - April 2019

the seers.”
The public and constant condemnation of
the apparitions issued by the two successive
competent judges as well as the negative
conclusions of first three commissions are
based on indisputably recorded facts. It seems
impossible that a future conclusion of the Holy
See could contradict this constant judgement
unless facts and testimonies are changed.

The Problems
The First Apparitions:
The first apparitions in Medjugorje provoked
terror and panic to the seers. Soon the
apparitions would start to appear anywhere and
everywhere as Bishop Zanic explained in July
1987:
“The Madonna started to appear on the
Podbrdo of the Mountain Crnica, but when the
militia forbade people from going there, she came
into houses, into forests, fields, vineyards and
tobacco fields; she appeared in the church, on
the altar, in the sacristy, in the choir loft, on the
roof, on the church steeple, on the roads, on the
way to Cerno, in a car, on buses, in classrooms,
in several places in Mostar and Sarajevo, in
monasteries in Zagreb, Varazdin, Switzerland and
Italy, once again on the Podbrdo, atop Krizevac,
in the parish, in the rectory, etc.”…
On July 3, 1981, the seers declared that it was
the last apparition. Since then, the apparitions
occur daily and even happen to different seers,
which is calculated to be more than 45,000 times.
On the 5th apparition, the “Madonna” seems
embarrassed before the request to produce a sign
proving her authenticity. The sign would never
happen. This would be, six years later, a motive
for Bishop Zanic’s gratitude.
“Thank you, Madonna, because with your
long silence of six years you have demonstrated
that you have not spoken here, nor appeared,
nor given any message or secret, nor promised
a special sign.” (Declaration of the Bishop of
Mostar in Medjugorje, July 25, 1987)
Doctrinal Problems:
Several points are of concern: the resurrection

of the flesh; hell, where the damned are still
“children of God” and where—according to
Mirjana—“people come to feel comfortable,” the
mediation of Mary, denied by the apparition: “I
do not say [I am mediatrix] of all graces. I receive
from God what I obtain through prayer…. Jesus
prefers that you address to Him directly, moreso
than through an intermediary.”
On October 1st, 1981, to the written question
“Are all religions good?” the seers transmitted the
answer: “All religions are equal before God.”
And also: “Peace, peace, peace…nothing but
peace. Be reconciled. All religions are the same
before God. God commands in all these religions
as a king does in his realm.”

affirmed having caught all the seers in lies. For
example, about the reason for being on the hill
during the first apparition: to hide and smoke.
In July, they admitted it to Bishop Zanic, then
obstinately denied it to Fr. Rene Laurentin, and
eventually—five years later—Ivanka would admit
it to Fr. Laurentin.
The Franciscans of Medjugorje, directors
and confidants of the seers lied also. Fr. Vlasic
perjured himself about Vicka’s diaries, Fr. Joko
Zovko added messages the seers never talked
about…
The contradictions of Fr. Laurentin,
propagandist of Medjugorje are so numerous that
they should exclude him of being taken seriously.

Ongoing Lies:
On June 30, 1981, the apparition declared that
it would only appear only three more times.
Several times, it promised the realization of
a great sign for precise dates. It affirmed that
it will quickly appease the quarrel opposing
the Franciscans to the Diocese. Bishop Zanic

The Apparition Supports the Franciscans’
Rebellion:
Since December 1981, the apparition
constantly supported the lack of discipline from
the Franciscans of Medjugorje, encouraging
them to ignore the sanctions imposed on them by
Bishop Zanic and their ecclesiastical superior.

13

Theme Marian Apparitions
When Fr. Ivica Vego was expelled from the
Franciscan Order for his disobedience and
bad example, the apparition supported him.
According to Vicka’s diaries and the seers’
declarations, it said 13 times that he was innocent
and the bishop wrong. Eventually, Ivica Vego,
abandoning the religious life, went to live with
the nun he had a child with…
Sexual misconducts happened also to Fr.
Jozo Zosko, ex-parish priest of Medjugorje and
to Fr. Vlasic who was eventually laicized after
being investigated “for the diffusion of dubious
doctrine, manipulation of consciences, suspected
mysticism and disobedience towards legitimately
issued orders.”
Strangeness, Oddness, and Eccentricity:
In his 2017 statement, Bishop Perić explained
that a study of the transcripts of interviews with
the six visionaries shows that the “Madonna”
usually speaks only when spoken to, “she laughs
in a strange way. In response to certain questions
she disappears and then returns, …she allows
some of those present to step on her veil lying on
the ground, to touch her clothes and her body.”
These touching sessions are disturbing and
frequent. Witnesses reported the “Madonna
allowed all those who wanted to come forward
and touch her,” the seers guided them saying:
“now you are touching her veil, her head, her
hand, her dress…”
Let us also mention the swallows and the
“black butterfly” that accompany the apparition,
“beautiful like an actress” according to Jakov; the
trembling of its hands, the fainting of the seers
when holy water is throw in its direction.
Greediness and Business:
Medjugorje became a lucrative business for
the seers, its propagandists and the whole town.
Bishop Zanic declared it plainly: “Laurentin
and the others are very wealthy liars. All those
who have written and published books, who
have filmed and reproduced video cassettes,
who diffuse souvenirs, etc. They have all made
themselves very, very rich. For money plays a
very important role in this whole affair.”
Mirjana, the mother of two children, runs a
guesthouse for pilgrims, very close to where
14

The Angelus

March - April 2019

Ivan and Jakov live. The Medjugorje locals have
nicknamed the street where visionaries live,
Millionaire Street.
How Was That Possible?
The apparitions were announced to Fr. Vlasic
in an alleged prophecy by Sr. Briege McKenna
during the Rome International Meeting of the
Charismatic Movement of May 1981. Through its
messages, Medjugorje supports the Charismatic
Movement, its doctrines, its practices, its leaders.
Frs. Zovko and Vlasic, in charge of the parish
and pilgrimage, Bishop Franic, the seers, the
propagandists of Medjugorje were or became
Charismatics.
The most famous lobbyist of Medjugorje,
French Charismatic and priest, Fr. Rene
Laurentin worked hard in selecting, editing, and
promoting the apparitions in opposition to the
local bishops. He received great benefits from the
sale of his books. After Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter
denying the support given to Medjugorje, he even
declared several times that he had never said or
written that Our Lady appeared in Medjugorje!
The political context and the new ecumenism
have also played their role in the support that
Rome gave to the partisans of Medjugorje against
the constant condemnation of the local bishops.
A Common Objection—The Good Fruits:
The piety of the pilgrims is often brought
as an objection. How can manipulation, lies
or diabolical influence bring such fruits like
confessions and conversions?
The answer is given by Bishop Zanic: “Here
people are praying and fasting a lot, inspired as
they are, of course, by the belief that these events
are indeed supernatural.”

Conclusion
Fr. Dugandzig, rector of Medjugorje in 1987
reproached Bishop Zanic “You are actually
working to prove that it is Satan in person who is
at work and that, since the time of Jesus Christ,
this is his greatest deception.” It seems difficult
not to subscribe to such an observation.

Picturing Our Lady: Richard Crashaw’s

“The Tear”
by Andrew J. Clarendon

Although only a privileged few have seen Our
Lady on this side of eternity, artists through the
centuries have created various representations
to convey this or that aspect of she who is our
Blessed Mother. One thinks of the beautiful and
even miraculous paintings around the world or
of the many musical compositions of the Ave
Maria or Magnificat. The poets have also used
the art of musical speech to praise Our Lady.
From St. Ephrem’s hymns on the Theotokos to
the Marian poetry of St. Thérèse of the Little
Flower, the saints have given the Church verses
of doctrine and devotion. In world literature, the
summit is Dante’s Divine Comedy, a thoroughly
Marian poem by the “most eloquent singer of the
Christian idea.” Even the non-Catholic William
Wordsworth, writing in a more modern time,
calls the Blessed Mother “Our tainted nature’s

solitary boast.” It is nevertheless true that
literature in English, although often Christian
in imagery and spirit, suffers from the effects of
the Protestant Revolution. The father of English
poetry, Chaucer, who died in 1400, was, of course,
a Catholic and wrote several poems in praise of
Mary. But by the time modern English—different
from Chaucer’s Middle English—was fully
evolved in the 17th-century, England was largely
Protestant with an increasing movement away
from Catholic beliefs and traditions.
A not-so-subtle anti-Catholicism over the
centuries helps us to account for both the lack of
English Catholic poets and the relative obscurity
of many of those who were. A good example is
Richard Crashaw, a convert and mystical Catholic
poet, whose work deserves more recognition
than it enjoys today.
15

Theme Marian Apparitions
The Life of Crashaw
Richard Crashaw was born around 1613,
some 60 years after Henry VIII’s lust and
Thomas Cranmer’s heresy began England’s
separation from 1,000 years of Catholicism.
In addition to the martyrdoms under Henry’s
daughter Elizabeth—most famously St. Edmund
Campion’s—that were cast by the government as
political events, it was after the Gunpowder Plot

his father’s death, young Richard attended
the Charterhouse School in London where he
started writing some verse and then went on
to Cambridge, the alma mater of many famous
English poets. While at Cambridge, Crashaw
was increasingly attracted to High Church
Anglicanism, which emphasizes the connections
with England’s Catholic heritage. The Archbishop
of Canterbury, William Laud, for example, called
for “beauty in holiness” and “more reverence

The Tear
What bright soft thing is this,
Sweet Mary, thy fair eyes’ expense?
A moist spark it is,
A wat’ry diamond, from whence
The very term, I think, was found
The water of a diamond.

O ’tis a tear
Too true a tear; for no sad eyne,
How sad so e’re,
Rain so true a tear as thine;
Each drop leaving a place so dear,
Weeps for itself, is its own tear.

O ’tis not a tear,
’Tis a star about to drop
From thine eye its sphere;
The sun will stoop and take it up.
Proud will his sister be to wear
This thine eyes’ jewel in her ear.

Such a pearl as this is,
Slipped from Aurora’s dewy breast
The rose bud’s sweet lip kisses;
And such the rose itself, when vexed
With ungentle flames, does shed,
Sweating in too warm a bed.

of 1605 that anti-Catholicism became equated
with English patriotism. The real question—and
a central issue during the subsequent Civil War
of 1642-1651—became how near or far from
the Old Faith the Anglican ritual and practices
would end up, with various forces wanting to
push the English church toward the Calvinistic
Puritans. Crashaw’s father William was a fiercely
anti-Catholic Anglican theologian and cleric
whose views inclined to the Puritan side. After
16

The Angelus

March - April 2019

and decorum in church ceremonial and service,
in the decoration of churches, and in the
elaboration of the ritual.” In 1638, Crashaw was
awarded a Master of Arts and ordained in the
Church of England. He was also friends with
Nicholas Ferrar, whose semi-monastic High
Church community at Little Gidding was later
made famous by T. S. Eliot. Having been cited
for “excessive Mariolatry” in 1641, Crashaw was
expelled from his church by Puritans during

the Civil War and fled into exile in 1644. Already
deeply attracted to the Catholic imagery and
practice of the Counter-Reformation era and
influenced by the spirituality of St. Teresa of
Ávila, Crashaw converted. After facing poverty
and ill-health, Crashaw, now a Catholic priest,
eventually received a position with an Italian
Cardinal, but died a short time later, in 1649.
Already known for a book of epigrams on sacred
subjects, such as the Wedding at Cana, and his

between things. He is also associated with the
Baroque movement in poetry. Better known in
music, architecture, sculpture, and painting, this
style is characterized by an abundance of detail
and ornamentation, by energy and movement,
by contrasts and surprise. The great themes
in Crashaw are a confidence in the love God
has for man and a celebration of the purity and
virtue of the Blessed Mother or other saints in
an impassioned, almost ecstatic voice. He is thus

Such the maiden gem,
By the wanton spring put on,
Peeps from her parent stem,
And blushes on the manly sun:
This wat’ry blossom of thy eyne,
Ripe, will make the richer wine.

Thus carried up on high,
For to Heaven thou must go
Sweetly shalt thou lie
And in soft slumbers bathe thy woe;
Till the singing orbs awake thee,
And one of their bright chorus make thee.

Fair drop, why quak’st thou so?
’Cause thou straight must lay thy head
In the dust? O no;
The dust shall never be thy bed:
A pillow for thee will I bring,
Stuffed with down of angels’ wing.

There thyself shalt be
An eye, but not a weeping one,
Yet I doubt of thee,
Whether th’ hadst rather there have shone
An eye of Heaven; or still shine here,
In th’ Heaven of Mary’s eye, a tear.

Steps to the Temple, a volume of hymns to Our
Lord was published after his death.

The Metaphysical School
As a poet, Crashaw is best known as a member
of the so-called “Metaphysical” school: poets
who employ striking metaphors and images to
convey complex and interesting comparisons

one of those poetic painters of Our Lady who
produces images of her so that we may know and
love her better.
One such example is his meditation on a
tear of the Blessed Mother. Whether it comes
from some painting or only his imagination is
unknown, but it is already unusual to focus
from the beginning of the poem on a single tear.
Further, the discussion is centered on the tear
itself, not on the cause of Our Lady’s weeping.
17

Theme Marian Apparitions
All the poet gives is that the tear is a great
“expense,” like a rich diamond.
The first stanza is remarkable for the various
contrasts the poet employs to introduce the
tear—beginning with a question as if it is not
clear what exactly the poet perceives. The tear is
“bright” like a “spark” of fire or a hard, glittering
diamond, but it is also water that appears to be
“soft.” Hence, amid this mixture of elements, the
poet gives a wonderful oxymoron in line three:
“A moist spark it is.” Next, the poet extends the
concept by calling the tear a star, likening Mary’s
eye to one of the celestial spheres that make
up the universe. The tear is like a meteorite,
perhaps, coming down to earth, when the sun,
now personified, takes up the “jewel,” this
diamond or star, to adorn “his sister.” The sun is
the Son, Christ, who wishes to adorn His sister—
the Christian Soul—with this symbol of Mary’s
compassion and beauty. The soul is decorated
with the graces acquired through Our Lady’s
mediation as a diamond shines in the ear of a
beautiful maiden. Despite this joyful sentiment, it
remains true that the Blessed Mother is weeping;
the beauty of the tear cannot fully overcome the
sense of sorrow. So, after affirming the tear is the
truest tear that can be shed, the tear itself starts
weeping because it leaves “a place so dear,” the
heavenly sphere of Mary’s eye.
The next two stanzas are in the spirit of the
Canticle of Canticles: the tear, now “a pearl,” is
compared to dew on a rose in the springtime. We
might think of May, Mary’s month. Here again,
is the action of Christ, a sort of holy violence to
create something higher. The dewdrop is on the
“lip” or edge of the rosebud until the sunlight
causes the rosebud to shed, or “sweat,” the dew.
These “ungentle flames” also act on the dewdrop
itself, which “blushes on the manly sun.”
Then the conclusion, recalling the wedding at
Cana: “This wat’ry blossom of thy eyne, / Ripe,
will make the richer wine.” From the tear of Mary
comes joy, the joy of the eternal nuptial feast
in Paradise. The poem concludes by affirming
that this “fair drop” will not fall in the dust and
be lost; rather, the poet places it on a pillow
and has it carried to Heaven where the music
of the heavenly spheres wakes it and makes it a
new star, another voice in the celestial chorus.
18

The Angelus

March - April 2019

Higher than all the stars and, we might add, with
the moon under her feet, is the Blessed Mother
herself, and so the poet affirms that the tear
would have rather stayed in the heaven of Mary’s
eye than to have become one of the stars of
physical heaven.
Such rich verse as this meditation on a tear
is part of our Catholic heritage in the Englishspeaking world. These artistic gems, some better
known than others, are many opportunities
to work to “restore all things in Christ.” If
Dostoevsky was right and “beauty will save
the world,” then it is precisely to these makers
of beauty that we must turn, both passing
on the cultural tradition and inspiring new
manifestations of the same eternal theme.

		

Catechism on

					 Private 		
				 Revelation
by Kevin Symonds

Editor’s Note: These extracts are taken from Refractions of Light, by Kevin Symonds (En Route
Books and Media, St. Louis MO, 2015). In his book, Mr. Symonds is using the latest official Church
document which sums up fairly well the traditional Church teaching on private revelations.

1. What is private revelation?
Private revelation is the supernatural
manifestation of a hidden truth by means of a
vision, a word, or only a prophetic instinct. The
term refers to all the visions and revelations that
have taken place since the completion of the New
Testament.

2. What is the purpose of private
revelation?
The purpose of private revelation is to provide
emphasis on a particular aspect of the Gospel

at a specific moment in time so as to lead the
faithful to a deepening of faith, hope and charity.

3. How does the Church respond to claims
of private revelations?
The Church exercises great caution with
respect to claims of private revelations as she
follows the Apostolic mandate to “test the
spirits.” It is also commonly said that the Church
moves slowly in these matters.

19

Theme Marian Apparitions
7. How are alleged private revelations to
be discerned?
The Church has published the Normae S.
Congregationis (May 2012). These norms offer
two, three-tiered structures that claims to private
revelations can go through.

8. What is the first structure?
The first structure concerns the competent
Ecclesiastical Authority and is delineated as
follows:
–– The local Ordinary.
–– The Conference of Bishops (or Synod in the
Eastern Churches).
–– The Congregation for the Faith and the pope.

9. What is the second structure?
–– The second structure concerns the process
of discernment and approbation of an alleged
private revelation. It is delineated as follows:
–– Initial judgment on the facts using positive and
negative criteria.
–– Permission may be given for certain public
demonstrations of cult and devotion while still
investigating the facts in question (otherwise
known as the “response of the faithful”).
–– Full judgment on the supernatural character of
the supposed events.

10. What are the negative criteria?
The negative criteria are as follows:
Manifest error concerning the fact.
Doctrinal errors attributed to God, the Virgin
Mary or saints in their manifestations. Vigilance
is necessary against the possibility of human
additions or errors being made in the alleged
revelations.
Evidence of a gain of profit strictly connected
to the fact.
The alleged visionary or followers commit
gravely immoral acts at the time of the alleged
revelation or on their occasion.
The alleged visionary demonstrates psychic
disorders or psychopathic tendencies that clearly
influenced the allegedly supernatural fact.

20

The Angelus

March - April 2019

11. What are the positive criteria?
–– The positive criteria are as follows:
–– There exists moral certitude or at least great
probability the alleged revelations are real.
–– The one claiming revelations demonstrates
psychological equilibrium, honesty and
rectitude of moral life, sincerity and habitual
docility towards Ecclesiastical Authority, and
capacity for returning to the normal regimen
of a life of faith.
–– There is true theological and spiritual doctrine
and immunity from error.
–– There is healthy devotion and abundant and
constant spiritual fruit.

20. Are the negative and positive criteria
meant to be the only criteria the Church
uses in her discernment of alleged private
revelations?
No, the criteria mentioned in the Normae
are not peremptory but rather indicative, and
they should be applied cumulatively or with
some mutual convergence. For instance, there
is nothing in the Normae about miracles as a
criterion, yet they have a role in the discernment
of a case.

21. Is there a fundamental principle by
which the Church discerns alleged private
revelations?
There is a fundamental principle that
the Church uses to discern alleged private
revelations: The criterion for the truth and value
of [alleged] private revelation is…its orientation
to Christ Himself. When it leads us away from
Him, when it becomes independent of Him or
even presents itself as another and better plan
of salvation, more important than the Gospel,
then it certainly does not come from the Holy
Spirit, who guides us more deeply into the Gospel
and not away from it. This does not mean that a
private revelation will not offer new emphases
or give rise to new devotional forms, or deepen
and spread older forms. But in all of this there
must be a nurturing of faith, hope and charity,
which are the unchanging path to salvation for
everyone.

22. Who determines if alleged private
revelations are from God or not?
The competent Ecclesiastical Authority
determines the character of such claims, and
firstly the local Ordinary.

26. In what four ways can a local Ordinary
intervene?
The four ways are as follows:
–– When devotion on the part of the faithful
begins quasi-spontaneously because of alleged
private revelations.
–– The faithful request the competent
Ecclesiastical Authority to intervene.
–– When grave circumstances warrant immediate
intervention of the Ecclesiastical Authority.
–– The Ecclesiastical Authority may also refrain
from making any judgment and taking any
direct action.

31. What then does “supernatural” mean
in the theology of private revelation?
In the theology of private revelation, the term
“supernatural” means three things:
–– The alleged private revelations are truly from
God.
–– They are declared to be such by the authority
of the Church.
–– The faithful can trust in the authenticity of the
claims if they so choose.

32. Why is it that, “…the faithful can
trust…if they so choose”?
The faithful are not bound to believe in alleged
private revelations, but only in public revelation.

34. What is the distinction between
“public” and “private” revelation?
According to the Congregation for the Faith,
the distinction between the two is as follows:
The term “public revelation” refers to the
revealing action of God directed to humanity as
a whole and which finds its literary expression
in the two parts of the Bible: the Old and New
Testaments. It is called “Revelation” because in

it God gradually made Himself known to men, to
the point of becoming man Himself, in order to
draw to Himself the whole world and unite it with
Himself through His Incarnate Son, Jesus Christ.
Public revelation “demands faith” and private
revelation “is a help to that faith.” It is not that
faith in itself.

35. Does believing in alleged private
revelations mean a person has put faith in
them?
Yes, but there is a difference between the
theological virtue of faith and human faith.
An individual can believe in alleged private
revelations on human faith but he or she does not
give the assent of divine or Catholic Faith, which
is given only to divine revelation.

37. If alleged private revelations contain a
message of world-wide importance, must the
faithful believe in the alleged message?
The Church distinguishes between “obligation”
and “disregard” with respect to an alleged
private revelation: [s]uch a message [i.e. alleged
private revelations] can be a genuine help in
understanding the Gospel and living it better at
a particular moment in time; therefore, it should
not be disregarded. It is a help which is offered,
but which one is not obliged to use.

38. What is the distinction between
“obliged” and “disregarded”?
Legitimate private revelations should not
be taken lightly. God has offered them for a
reason and the faithful should seriously consider
the message being given. However, private
revelations (whether legitimate or fraudulent) do
not enjoy an obligatory character—the faithful
are not obliged to believe in them.

68. In what manner is a judgment made
on the supernatural character of a claim to
private revelations?
After investigating the facts of a case, the local
Ordinary renders his judgment publicly by way
21

Theme Marian Apparitions
of one of three Latin expressions:
Constat de supernaturalitate—There is
evidence of the supernatural
Non constat de supernaturalitate—There is
no evidence of the supernatural
Constat de non supernaturalitate—There is
evidence of the non supernatural
79. May Catholics disregard a directive
on alleged private revelations issued by a
local Ordinary who does not or is said not to
believe in any private revelation?
The faithful may not disregard a directive by
the local Ordinary even though he may not be
inclined to believe in any private revelation.
94. Why are obedience and humility the
fundamental virtues?
The purpose of legitimate private revelations
is to lead the faithful to greater holiness,
including the person said to be receiving the
alleged revelations. Pride is the deadliest sin and
humility is necessary to combat it. Obedience
safeguards against self-will. If a person is
possessed of his or her own self-will and not
obedient to the Church and her representatives,
such actions are sure signs of pride and
disobedience. These actions are critical in the
discernment of alleged private revelations.
179. Does the Church provide the faithful
with a teaching on any signs of false private
revelations to detect a diabolical origin?
The Church’s tradition on the interior life of
virtue provides the faithful with some general
signs to help discern a possible diabolical
origin other than the positive and negative signs
mentioned above.
180. What are those signs?
According to the Dominican theologian, Dom
Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, in Three Ages of the
Interior Life, the following are to be looked at as
signs of the evil spirit:
1. Pride in the soul that leads to trouble,
discouragement and even despair.
2. An exaggerated mortification.
3. False humility spurred on by spiritual pride.
4. A focus upon what is most extraordinary
22

The Angelus

March - April 2019

and marvelous to make the faithful feel esteemed
or bring about what is foreign to our vocation.
5. Presumption, which undermines the
theological virtue of hope.
6. The creation of self-love in the faithful.
7. Engendering dissensions and hatreds as
opposed to peace.
8. Evident sin which cannot be concealed
creates confusion, vexation and discouragement
in the soul.
Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange ends by saying, “the
lack of humility and obedience is a certain
indication that it is not God who guides [the
person in question].”
186. What are some examples of good and
bad fruits?
Good fruits are those things that encourage
people in holiness such as increase in one’s
prayer life, conversion, increased docility to the
laws and teachings of the Church, increase in
virtue.
Bad fruits lead one away from God. Examples
are: disobedience to the Church and her
representatives, misrepresentation of the
Church or her representatives, increase in pride,
choosing alleged revelations over and above the
teaching authority of the Church.
Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange’s signs of the evil spirit
as given above are also examples of negative
fruits. In all things, we would do well to heed the
advice of St. Teresa of Avila who wrote in The
Interior Castle: “Such [mystical] experiences,
if we use them aright, prepare us to be better
servants of God; but sometimes it is the weakest
whom God leads by this road; and so there
is no ground here either for approval or for
condemnation. We must base our judgments on
the virtues. The saintliest will be she who serves
Our Lord with the greatest mortification and
humility and purity of conscience.”

A Debate on
the Mountain
Our Lady of La Salette

by Fr. Dominique Bourmaud, SSPX, vs. Advocate

Context on the Debate
In order to illustrate the sound principles
which ought to come into play in order to judge
the veracity or falsity of private apparitions,
we offer our readers, under the form of debate,
a free discussion concerning the apparitions
of Our Lady of La Salette, France. Our friendly
“skirmish” consists of four sections. After giving
the context of the apparitions and the topic of
debate, an anonymous Advocate will take the
side of the opposition. Fr. Dominique Bourmaud
will give the defense of the apparitions, before a
conclusion summing up the results.
Due to the economy of space, this debate is
limited in its scope. It is not concerned with the
public text of September 19, 1846. It is not putting
into question the secret of Maximin for Pius
IX, which concerned mostly his relation with

Napoleon III. What is at stake here is the veracity
of the apparitions of La Salette taken as a whole.
This includes the judgment of the mental and
spiritual sanity of the seers, especially Melanie.
It also treats the private revelation of Melanie
as contained in its definitive form in 1879. This
form has been attacked both as to its content and
to its diffusion. Regarding the diffusion, indeed,
the secret was the object of successive sanctions
by the Roman authorities in 1880, 1915, 1922 and
1957. Regarding the content, it must be said that
this revelation was written in an apocalyptic and
prophetic vein and was susceptible to playing
into the hands of Freemasonry against the
Catholic Church.
Before we close this introduction and
proceed to the debate, we bring up the fact that
Traditional Catholics are far from having a
23

Theme Marian Apparitions
uniform opinion regarding the apparition. Some
are strongly unfavorable to the private revelation
of Melanie, whereas others, like Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre who mentions publicly: “Of
course, you well know the apparitions of Our
Lady at La Salette, where she says that Rome will
lose the Faith, that there will be an ‘eclipse’ in
Rome; an eclipse, see what Our Lady means by
this” (Episcopal Consecrations of June 30, 1988).

Fr. Bourmaud—A Short
History of La Salette
A small paddock in the French Alps next to
a hamlet called La Salette was the object of
much talk in the 19th century. Was it the Blessed
Mother who, weeping and dressed in mournful
attire with the instruments of the Passion, really
appeared to Mélanie Calvat and Maximin Giraud
on September 19, 1846?
An enthusiastic wave of approval fell upon
this “Sacred Mountain” which received the seal
of approval of the local Bishop of Grenoble three
years later. Indeed, the only thing divulged at that
time to the public was the short Marian message
which scolded “the peasants for working on
Sunday, to the carriage drivers for swearing and
others for going to the butcher shop like dogs
during Lent.” There was mention of a famine, and
eventually one came to devastate France’s wheat
harvest in the 1850s alongside the infamous
potato famine in France.
At this juncture, events took a sour turn.
The favorable Bishop of Grenoble died and was
replaced by one much more suspicious of the
apparitions, especially as those who claimed to
have seen Our Lady were asked to put to writing
a short version of the message she divulged
to them in 1851. It was not until 1858 that the
apparition allowed one of the seers, Melanie, to
reveal the entire Secret of La Salette, which she
wrote at different times until the final version
was published with the Imprimatur of the
Bishop of Lecce, Italy.
The historical context of the alleged apparition
is bleak. It was the time of a rabid assault against
the Faith (Renan’s blasphemous Life of Jesus was
published in 1864 in France) and the Pontifical
24

The Angelus

March - April 2019

States in Italy fell. (Napoleon III is mentioned
especially in Maximin’s secret to the pope earlier
on). Here is an extract of Maximin’s private
revelation: “Let the pope not come out of Rome
after 1859. Let him distrust Napoleon whose
heart is divided and, when he wants to become
both pope and emperor, soon God will withdraw
from him; he is this eagle which, intent in rising
upwards, will fall upon the sword which he
wished to use to force nations to elevate him.”
All these versions of Melanie’s secret contain
highly suspicious texts which raised more than
one eyebrow. For example: “In 1864, Lucifer with
a great number of demons will be detached from
hell: they will slowly abolish the Faith, including
in souls consecrated to God; they will blind
them in such a way that, without a special grace,
these people will absorb the mindset of these
evil angels; several religious houses will totally
lose the Faith and will damn many others...Rome
will lose the Faith and become the seat of the
Antichrist.” Along with this unsettling secret,
Melanie also wrote the rule of the Order of the
Mother of God, a religious Order which is yet to
see the light of day.
At that time, Pius IX and, later on, Leo XIII,
showed themselves personally favorable to
the apparitions at La Salette and grateful for
the secret letters sent to them. Yet, in France’s
divided episcopate and in Roman circles, the
wind eventually turned against the seers and
their alleged private revelations. From then on,
it is especially Melanie who was under assault.
She was sent into exile in England and made
her way into southern Italy where she found
powerful allies who saw in her a living saint and
a stigmatist. After a long time she finally returned
to France, treated by many as a mad woman who
should have been committed.

Advocate—Some Concerns
about La Salette
As an introduction, allow me to state two
things which will color the whole of my response.
Firstly, I write primarily as an advocatus diaboli:
not someone who is sure of the veracity of
the claims either way. Rather, I see enough

In 1846, the village of
La Salette consisted of
eight or nine scattered
hamlets. The population
was about 800,
principally small farmers
with their families and
dependents. On the
evening of Saturday
September 19, 1846,
Maximin Giraud and
Mélanie Calvat returned
from the mountain where
they had been tending
their cows and reported
seeing “a beautiful lady”
on Mount Sous-Les
Baisses, weeping bitterly.
They described her as
sitting with her elbows
resting on her knees
and her face buried
in her hands. She was
clothed in a white robe
studded with pearls; and
a gold-colored apron;
white shoes with roses
about her feet and a high
headdress. Around her
neck she wore a crucifix
suspended from a small
chain.

Theme Marian Apparitions
questions to be raised and answered before a
balanced consideration can be reached.
Secondly, I can only emphasize what was
printed in Mr. Symonds’s brief catechism. When
the Church approves an apparition, it is not a
positive approval meaning an imposition of an
obligation for the faithful to believe in one or
any of them. It simply means that the original
message of La Salette, when the Church approved
it, was limited to a judgment of nothing against
faith and morals at the time.
The 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia quotes Pope
Benedict XVI on this point: “It is not obligatory
nor even possible to give them the assent of
Catholic Faith, but only of human faith, in
conformity with the dictates of prudence, which
presents them to us as probable and worthy of
pious belief.”
Let us begin where there is no substantial
controversy. In 1846, when Maximin and Melanie,
11 and 14 respectively at the time, first reported
their vision, the Church, through the local bishop,
went through the normal procedures. While
it is true that there was controversy from the
beginning—as there seems to be with any private
revelation—after several years, the local bishop
(Bishop de Bruillard) approved it as worthy of
belief.
But there is more to the story. Beyond what
was communicated in 1846—the necessity
of sanctifying the Lord’s day, the widespread
use and tolerance of blasphemy, and the
encouragement to pray daily—Our Lady
supposedly gave a private revelation to each
of the seers. This is precisely where the real
controversy begins and where complications
arise.
In 1851, five years after the apparition, Bishop
de Bruillard asks Maximin and Melanie to
commit their secrets to writing so that they might
be sent to the Holy Father, who was then Pius
IX. Although the secrets were indeed sent to and
received by the Holy Father, we have no record of
his reaction. Here is a brief quote from Maximin’s
secret:
“[T]he Faith will die out in France: three
quarters of France will not practice religion
anymore, or almost no more...Then, afterward,
nations will convert, the Faith will be rekindled
26

The Angelus

March - April 2019

everywhere. A great country, now Protestant,
in the north of Europe, will be converted; by
the support of this country all the other nations
of the world will be converted. Before all that
arrives, great disorders will arrive in the Church
and everywhere. Then, afterward, our Holy
Father the pope will be persecuted. His successor
will be a pontiff that nobody expects. Then, after,
a great peace will come, but it will not last a long
time. A monster will come to disturb it. All that
I tell you here will arrive in the other century, at
the latest in the year 2,000.”
As I write, it is 2019. I leave it to the reader to
formulate his own judgment. Melanie’s original
private revelation, meaning the one submitted in
1851, is even more specific and dire:
“Paris, this city soiled by all kinds of crimes,
will perish infallibly. Marseilles will be destroyed
in a little time. When these things arrive, the
disorder will be complete on the earth, the world
will be given up to its impious passions. The pope
will be persecuted from all sides, they will shoot
at him, they will want to put him to death, but
no one will be able to do it, the Vicar of God will
triumph again this time…A great king will go up
on the throne, and will reign a few years. Religion
will re-flourish and spread all over the world, and
there will be a great abundance, the world, glad
not to be lacking anything, will fall again into its
disorders, will give up God, and will be prone to
its criminal passions…Lastly, hell will reign on
earth. It will be then that the Antichrist will be
born of a Sister, but woe to her! Many will believe
in him, because he will claim to have come from
Heaven, woe to those who will believe in him! That
time is not far away, twice 50 years will not go by.”
What happened to Maximin and Melanie?
Maximin died at the age of 39, having tried a
vocation and served in the military. He professed
his belief in the apparitions until the end, even
writing an autobiography defending his account.
It is, however, Melanie’s life and actions which
primarily concern us.
In 1851, at the age of 20, Melanie took the habit
with the Sisters of Providence, where she had
boarded for several years. In 1854, the new bishop
of Grenoble refused to allow her to be professed;
Melanie saw in this political intrigue and changed
norms for convents.

In 1855, she moved to a Carmel in England,
where she made temporary vows. In 1858, she
wrote to the Holy Father, asking permission to
reveal her private revelation, pleading that she
had been instructed to do so that year. While Pius
IX did not do so, he did later dispense Melanie
from her vow at the Carmel. She then spent time
in a convent in France, then Greece, then France
again.
In 1870, she moved to Italy where she knew
several friendly bishops. She stayed in Italy until
she died in 1904. In 1873, she wrote her new,
longer, version of the secret at the request of the
Cardinal Archbishop of Naples. In the meantime,
she drafted constitutions for two new religious
orders connected to La Salette—one for men
and another for women. The local bishop refused
and several years of appeals followed, eventually
leading to a meeting between Melanie and Pope
Leo XIII in 1878. The “Melanists,” or devoted
followers of Melanie, published a transcript of
sorts, claiming the Holy Father was favorable. As
it stands, however, Leo XIII made no decision and
there is no evidence of a report of the meeting
from the side of Rome.
In 1879, she published (for the first time) the
secret in toto with the imprimatur of the local
bishop in Italy. Creating a storm in France, the
matter was referred to Rome. The involvement
of Cardinal Caterini, who wrote a letter to the
bishop of Troyes in 1880, is a matter of some
dispute since it remains unclear whether he
acted in his official capacity as Secretary of
the Congregation of the Holy Office or not.
Regardless, Melanie’s book would be placed in
the Index.
In 1892, Melanie finished writing her
autobiography, which she had done under the
direction of Fr. Gilbert Combe, a priest drawn to
her by his interest in prophecies, especially ones
that touched on politics. In 1894, he published
another version of Melanie’s secret, along with
his own speculation, trying to interpret her
prophecies and attaching dates to them. It was,
again, put in the Index. It was characters like
Fr. Combe (alas, not alone!) that prompted
Jacques Maritain later to say: “There was a small
number of fanatics who made the Secret of La
Salette a partisan affair, and whose aberrant

interpretations, and their manner of using
prophecies like a railway timetable, could only
compromise the cause which they claimed to
defend.”
The position of Rome seems clear enough:
originally prohibited under Leo XIII and Benedict
XV, Pius XI later reaffirmed Rome’s stance on
the second secret. Ironically, it was only with the
elimination of the Index following the Second
Vatican Council that most Catholics could
technically read the second secret. (Interestingly,
however, Monsignor Bloy, one of his Melanie’s
closest defenders, was put up for beatification
twice before the Council: in 1936, and 1951.
Both times it was refused in part because of
his connection with the controversy. In 1985,
the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
“permanently” shut the door on this process.)
Without repeating the bulk of these
apocalyptic prophecies again here (all of which
are widely available), it must be said that the
outlandish or “over-the-top” nature of the private
revelatory secrets given to the seers, ostensibly
by Our Lady of La Salette, are, as Fr. Bourmaud
noted, apocalyptic in tone. They say much of the
great travail and woes to come, but very little
of the love and compassion Our Lord expresses
through His Sacred Heart. While there is a
longstanding tradition of Our Lady presenting
dire warnings to the faithful, the shaky history
surrounding the La Salette secrets and the seers
they were entrusted to presents ample room for
pause.

Fr. Bourmaud—In
Defense of La Salette
So much negativity has surrounded the private
revelation and the seers, both from the laity and
the Church hierarchy, that it throws a veil of
suspicion and serious doubt as to the veracity
of the apparitions altogether. Can something be
said in Our Lady of La Salette’s defense? It seems
so indeed and, although the arguments in favor
may not totally wipe away the stain and sting
of uneasiness, it may shed some light as to the
how and why the seers, particularly Melanie and
her secret, were such a sign of contradiction.
27

Theme Marian Apparitions
We shall divide the arguments by bringing up
firstly the content, and then touch on the Roman
censures of the secret.
Firstly, Fr. Del Magno presented a report
largely favorable to the Holy Office.
“The secret is prophetic and we all know
that such style resolves in threats which
are conditional. Ninive converted and the
punishment announced was averted. Hence,
if these prophetic statements contain some
dogmatic errors and calls to heresy and schism,
the Church must publicly condemn them.
Otherwise, the Church never got involved and
avoided approving their publication according to
the just axiom: De futuris contingentibus nulla
determinata veritatis—No determination of
truth regarding contingent future events... Having
read the content of the alleged secret of Melanie, I
found nothing against the dogma, the precepts of
the Church or the sources of the Faith as received
by the Church.”
Secondly, Bishop Zola, the bishop of Lecce who
granted the Imprimatur to the secret in 1879,
was even more positive.
“By the constitution of Pius IV Dominici
Gregis, the bishop should oppose only the
publication of books which are either heretical,
or suspect of heretical depravity, or which
harm morals or piety. Yet, no such things can be
imputed to Melanie’s writings, on the contrary.
Besides, having had in my hands the manuscript
of the secret for a long time, I can testify to the
accomplishment of predictions contained in it,
and I am willing to swear it before God. Hence, I
am convinced of the authenticity of the revelation
by the virtues of the happy shepherdess, by
the concordant sentiment of several bishops
and, especially, by the accomplishment of the
prophecies.”
Thirdly, readers may very well wonder why the
secret was revealed little by little, and not right
away in 1846. Here is how Melanie explained it:
“If the secret had contained the praises of
the clergy, be assured that I would not have
tarried long to publish it. I am certain that the
publication of the secret, as the merciful Blessed
28

The Angelus

March - April 2019

Mother Mary gave it to me, will make me many
enemies.”
Now let us turn to those who besmirched the
private revelations of La Salette.
The first attack against the private revelation
was the letter of Cardinal Caterini in 1880. After
the publication of the secret in 1879 in Lecce
and Lyons, some French leaders led by Bishop
Cortet of Troyes opposed it. The congregation of
the Index refused to condemn something which
dealt only with affirmation of facts and not with
doctrine. It diverted the judgment to the Holy
Office which was also largely favorable to the
secret. Yet, the opposition finally prevailed—
although under cover since Leo XIII knew the
secret and approved it—and prevented the
diffusion of the secret.
As an anecdote, it is said that Caterini’s
letter to Cortet said the following: “Let them be
withdrawn from the hands of the faithful, but
maintain them in the hands of the clergy for their
profit.” This would seem to be sufficient proof
of the divinity of the message. Needless to say,
this line was quickly silenced from the French
publications.
Besides this prevention, the secret was
published several times and a new Roman
commission in 1881 examined the secret by
papal order and found it irreproachable. And so,
it seems as if the so-called “condemnation” was
the work of a Roman faction conniving with 12
French prelates whose tendencies were much
more Gallican [those who wished to restrict
papal authority], not to say Republican, than
Roman.
After the publication of more polemical
writings, the Holy Office in 1915 made another
decision about La Salette, complaining about the
constant discussions relative to the secret: “The
Sacred Congregation orders that all faithful, of
whichever country, abstain to discuss the topic
under any pretext or form.”
However, this decree did not prevent the
reading and diffusion of Melanie’s private
revelation itself which had been sealed and had
the seal of the Imprimatur. It simply sanctioned
abusive and non-authorized commentaries, but it
did not sanction those submitted to ecclesiastical
authorities. This is how Jacques Maritain wrote

to Cardinal Billot about it, who, by way of reply,
said that the publication of the private revelation
was inopportune, but at the same time asked his
own opinion on the matter.
Finally, the Holy Office condemned the
publication of the booklet The Apparition of
the Blessed Virgin edited by the Société SaintAugustin. Most likely, what prompted this decree
was the renewal of the polemics which the
earlier decree wished to suppress. But the main
reason for Rome’s reaction was probably the
surreptitious addition of a letter from Mariavé
(Dr. Grémillion) which contained language quite
abusive of the authorities. All in all, it seems
plausible that the Roman decisions to stall the
diffusion of the secret were more prudential and
circumstantial than theological.
As a closing note and in order to complete
the defense’s plea, it is most interesting to study
the portrait of the seer herself. Fr. Laurentin’s
book Découverte du Secret de La Salette has
a chapter dedicated to prove the psychological
and supernatural balance of the seers, and
particularly of Melanie persecuted many French
ecclesiastics. Was Melanie mentally unstable?
Were her stigmata legitimate or not? These
remain hotly contested points of debate that are
unlikely to be unraveled in the near future.

Concluding Postscript
The ongoing debate over La Salette has wider
implications. While many Catholics today,
including non-traditionalists, generally accept
the possibility of Marian apparitions and private
revelation, there are those Catholics who find in
them a source of annoyance or embarrassment.
For every powerful testimony concerning the
rightly famous apparitions at Lourdes and Fatima
or the miracles wrought in the borderlands of
East and West at the Pochaev Lavra in Ukraine,
there are public spectacles like “Our Lady of the
Underpass”—a salt stain under a highway bridge
in Chicago that was purported to be an image of
Our Lady.
The debate over the veracity of any private
revelation typically comes down to the content
of the message and the character of those who

allegedly received the revelation. Taking these
points out of order, it should be stated that no
man is without sin. Even the greatest saints of
the Church struggled with personal flaws, some
of which haunted them for the duration of their
lives. Nowhere has the Church ever taught that
those blessed with receiving private revelations
had to be perfect, either before or after. God
can use very imperfect instruments to carry out
his divine plan. Think, for instance, of Jonah,
arguably the most obstinate prophet in Scripture
and yet one of Our Lord’s most successful in
terms of turning the hearts of those to whom he
preached.
As for the content of private revelations such
as La Salette, few of us want to think of wrath,
turmoil, and judgment, and yet they are all part
of the human experience in this postlapsarian
world. Yes, God is love, but He is also a Father
who corrects His children, especially at the
height of their disobedience. Although not all
of the private revelations allegedly given by
Our Lady of La Salette have come to pass (as
far as we can tell), that does not foreclose the
possibility that they will. Moreover, perhaps
these dire warnings are just that: warnings. Their
consequences can still be averted so long as we
proceed in the manner God wishes and choose
to rely on His mercy rather than our own fickle
preferences.
The debate over La Salette and other
apparitions and revelations is far from over. No
doubt that is a good thing. By reflecting seriously
on these potentially miraculous occurrences,
our hearts and minds are naturally drawn to
God the Father, Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy
Spirit, Our Blessed Mother, and all the saints.
While reasonable minds may disagree about the
veracity of this or that miracle or revelation, all
of us who hold to the Faith know that God is
not an abstraction, some distant “watchmaker”
unconcerned with His creation, but rather the
One who has made all things shining in His
unfathomable love and desires the salvation of
all.

29

For St. Peter Julian Eymard, La Salette was a place of great religious significance
almost from the moment he first heard the reports of what happened there. La Salette
was an event that occurred in Fr. Eymard’s lifetime and in his own part of the world. In
correspondence with his sisters in December 1846, he observed that some people were
making fun of the children’s story. It is clear that Eymard recognized and accepted the
miraculous nature of La Salette from the outset, long before the Church had formally
investigated the event and before he had ever visited the place.

Spirituality

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

The Collect
by Fr. Christopher Danel

The Church prays with a lively faith in the mediation of Jesus Christ, and an unshaken confidence in
His merits; as Christ has merited grace for us all, He has therefore also secured a favorable answer to
our prayers. For Christ’s sake, we are favored and blessed by God. Whenever God looks upon the face of
His Anointed, in whom He is eternally well-pleased, He will, through Christ and for the sake of Christ,
graciously receive and hear our petitions by pouring out upon us His abundant mercies and blessings.
– Monsignor Nicholas Gihr

Introduction
In this article we will examine the Collect,
presenting the work of Monsignor Nicholas
Gihr in his fundamental liturgical commentary
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: Dogmatically,
Liturgically, and Ascetically Explained.
Monsignor Gihr was a priest of the Archdiocese
of Freiburg in Breisgau whose work of liturgical
research took place during the time frame
spanning the pontificates of Popes Pius IX to
32

The Angelus

March - April 2019

Pius XI, including that of Pope St. Pius X. The
early years of his work were contemporaneous
with the last years in the work of Dom Prosper
Guéranger. The English translation of his study
appeared in 1902; the original is: Gihr, Nikolaus.
Messopfer dogmatisch, liturgisch und aszetisch
erklärt. Herder: Freiburg im Breisgau, 1877.

The Collect
After the Gloria or the Kyrie follows the
principal prayer, that is, the particular prayer
of the day or of the feast, and which, as a rule,
is called the Collect. Like the Mass prayers
in general, this prayer before the Epistle is
not merely a private prayer of the priest, but
a liturgical one, that is, a public prayer which
the celebrant recites in the name and by the
commission of the Church, and with a special
intention for the welfare of the whole Christian
people.
The priest stands at the altar as mediator
between God and man, he presents there the
desires and interests of all before the throne of
God. The faithful assisting at the Sacrifice are of
one heart and one soul; they pray interiorly and
unite with the priest who, as their representative,
gathers up and collects, so to say, their
supplications and desires to present them before
God. The celebrant is the angel of the Lord who
puts the holy incense, namely, the devout prayers
of fervent Christians, into the golden chalice of
his heart, whence they sweetly ascend to the
throne of the Most High (Apoc. 8:3-4).

As a collective prayer, the Collect is still to be
considered under another aspect. It is considered,
namely, as a prayer which, in comprehensive
brevity, embodies the most important petitions,
that is, the sum or idea of all that we, in
consideration of the day’s celebration, especially
seek to obtain from God.
Finally, some persons discover in the word
Collecta an admonition for priest and people to
gather and keep all their senses and thoughts
collected together, in order to offer to God in
profound recollection of spirit (collectis animis)
the supplications comprised in the prayer.

Dominus Vobiscum
The priest kisses the altar and would not turn
to the people without having previously evinced
this reverence toward the sanctuary. The priest
would at the same time indicate that all the help
and all the blessings of grace that he wishes to
the people present must come from the altar
and from our union with the Savior sacrificing
Himself upon it. With hands joined before
33

Spirituality
his breast and with downcast eyes, the priest
with grave and measured step turns toward the
people; then, while slowly extending and joining
the hands, he salutes the entire Church in the
person of those present with the benediction
“Dominus vobiscum—The Lord be with you.”
This formula of well-wishing dates back to the
Old Testament. In the book of Ruth it is related
that Booz greeted his reapers in the field with
the words: “Dominus vobiscum” (Ruth 2:4). To
the blessed Virgin the Archangel Gabriel said:
“Dominus tecum” (Lk. 1:28). The aforesaid
salutation is frequently repeated during the
celebration of Mass (eight times), in order to
constantly excite, increase and awaken afresh
the spiritual union and the communion of prayer
during the Holy Sacrifice between the priest and
the people.
And how do the people respond to this
greeting of the priest? By the mouth of the
acolyte or by chanting, they answer with the
corresponding greeting: “Et cum spiritu tuo.”
The same or a similar wish for a blessing was
frequently employed by St. Paul in his Epistles
(cf. II Tim. 4:22; Gal. 6:22). Out of gratitude for
the imparted salutation and blessing, the people
express the wish that the Lord would, with His
enlightening and strengthening grace, replenish
and penetrate the spirit of the celebrant, that he
may, as a man of God, and a truly spiritual man,
be enabled to present in a worthy manner the
petitions and supplications of the whole Church.
The priest does indeed greatly stand in need of
the assistance of this grace, when he is standing
at the altar; the priest appears at the altar by
commission of the Church, the immaculate
Spouse of Christ, there to recite for the welfare
and salvation of the living and the dead those
venerable prayers which she herself, inspired by
the Holy Ghost, has composed and prescribed.
The bishop ordinarily salutes the faithful
during Holy Mass with the Dominus vobiscum,
except that before the Collect the bishop’s
salutation on those days on which the Gloria is
said, is: “Pax vobis – Peace be to you!” Both the
sacerdotal and the episcopal salutation come
from the lips of the representative of Christ,
not as some mere empty wish, but as a blessing
spoken with the efficacy of a higher power,
34

The Angelus

March - April 2019

containing within itself supernatural strength; so
that in reality it imparts the good it expresses to
all whose hearts are susceptible to it. “The Lord
stands at the door and knocks; to anyone who
hears His voice and opens the door to Him, He
will come and enter with His peace” (Apoc. 3:20).

The Form of the Collect
After this introduction follows the Collect
itself, a prayer distinguished as much for the
beauty and perfection of its form as for the
copiousness and depth of its contents. The
Collect is, therefore, a prayer of petition for the
particular grace of the day: but in what form is
this petition clothed? Amid all the variety and
diversity of the Collects, there still prevails
a certain uniformity in their construction,
which shows that they have been composed
after a specified and general rule. The petition
is not simply presented to God by itself, but is
supported by other acts of prayer, in order that
it may be made so much the more fervent and
efficacious. St. Paul mentions supplications,
prayers, petitions, and thanksgivings (I Tim. 2:1).
These four methods of prayer are not only found
alternately in the course of the celebration of the
Holy Sacrifice, but they are, for the most part,
combined in each Collect, which forms these
acts into a perfect and most effectual prayer
of petition. The person praying must approach
God, draw nigh unto God, elevate himself to
God (oratio); and then present his petitions
(postulatio), and to obtain more speedily what
is asked for, he joins to it his motives: one of
which is gratitude or thanksgiving (gratiarum
actio); for in so far as we are grateful for
benefits received, do we obtain graces yet
more plentifully; but the most efficient means
for having our petitions granted is to beg
them of God by the merits and intercession
of Jesus Christ: hence the concluding words
“through Christ our Lord,” words which express
the entreaty (obsecratio). Thus, the Church
complies with the admonition of the Apostle:
“In everything by prayer and supplication with
thanksgiving let your petitions be made known to
God” (Phil. 4:6).

Offered to the Holy Trinity
The prayers of the Holy Mass may be
addressed to the holy and indivisible Trinity or to
any one of the divine Persons: when the latter is
done, it is self-evident that the other two Persons
are not excluded, but rather virtually included,
and to make this obvious they are, as a rule,
expressly mentioned. It is the same with respect
to the Collects. Whether they be directed to the
Father or to the Son, there follows at any rate at
the conclusion an explicit confession and solemn
acknowledgment of the Holy Trinity.
The Collects were originally and without
exception (and are now usually) addressed to the
Father. For the Father is the first Person of the
Blessed Trinity and as such He is, in a manner,
the original source not only of the divine nature
which from all eternity He imparts to the Son and
with the Son to the Holy Ghost, but of all created
things. To the Father are principally attributed
(appropriated) power and majesty, revealed in the
creation of the world; the Father has sent us His
only-begotten Son, and together with Him He has
given us all things. Jesus Christ Himself offered
His whole life, actions, sufferings and especially
His prayers to God the Father. The Savior in His
prayer to God was not only our advocate, but
also our model and leader in prayer. He always
prayed to His Father to show that the Father
is His origin. The Father, whom Jesus, from
eternity, receives His divine nature and by whom
His human nature also was created, and from
whom it received all the good that it possessed.
Inasmuch as the Church when praying usually
has recourse to the Father, she in this respect
follows not merely the example but, moreover,
the teaching of Christ, who said to His Apostles:
“Amen, amen I say to you, if you ask the Father
anything in my name, He will give it to you” (Jn.
16:23). In this we see another example of why the
Collects, for the most part, are addressed to the
Father. Our petitions should be presented “in the
name of Jesus.” Jesus is the Mediator through
whom all our prayers and supplications ascend
to Heaven, and through whom all graces and
merits descend upon earth; hence for the sake
of the Son we pray to the Father who sent Him,
by concluding the Collects with these words

“through our Lord Jesus Christ.” This rule is
especially observed at Holy Mass, in which the
Son offers Himself to the heavenly Father.
Some of the Collects are addressed to the
second Person of the Holy Trinity, because
they have a particular and closer relation to the
mystery of the Incarnation or to the Incarnate
Word. On the other hand, we do not find in our
Missal a single Collect addressed to the Holy
Ghost, while in the liturgy there are other prayers
to the Holy Ghost and hymns in His honor
wherein He is invoked and glorified as God.
The form of the conclusion of the Collect is
modified in a five-fold manner, according as
the Collect is addressed to the Father or to the
Son. (According as in a Collect addressed to the
Father mention is made of the second or third
divine Person). The usual form of conclusion
is as follows: Per Dominum nostrum Jesum
Christum Filium tuum, qui tecum vivit et
regnat in unitate Spiritus Sancti Deus, per
omnia saecula saeculorum—Through our Lord
Jesus Christ Thy Son, who liveth and reigneth
with Thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God,
world without end.” Thus, the Collects end and
thus they rise to a magnificent praise of the Most
Holy Trinity.

Conclusion
Per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum:
How solemn, how overpowering, how grand are
these words! With what courage and confidence,
with what consolation and consciousness of
victory should they fill us! “Were it not for the
intercession of our Mediator, without doubt, the
cry of our supplication would go up unheard
in the presence of God” (St. Gregory the Great,
Moralium). In our prayers, therefore, we put our
trust and reliance in the power and goodness, in
the merits and mercy of our living and reigning
Eternal High Priest, Jesus Christ. Thus sings the
Church in the sequence for Easter: “The Prince
of life, who died, now liveth and reigneth.” Dux
vitae mortuus regnat vivus!

35

264 pp.–Flexible Softcover–
STK# 8628–$19.95

The Little
Office of
the Blessed
Virgin Mary
The best prayer is the prayer of the Church. Here
it is—simpler than the Breviary, but essentially
the same. Pray the inspired psalms of the Holy
Ghost. Around since the 8th century. Hated by
heretics, loved by friends of Our Lady. Recited by
Saints John Damascene, Catherine of Siena, Vincent Ferrer, Louis of France, Bridget of Sweden,
and many more.

177 pp.–Softcover–
STK# 8469–$13.95

Living
the Little
Office
The Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary is one
of the liturgical treasures of the Catholic Church.
With a history of over 1,000 years, it has been
prayed by clerics and faithful alike. Learn the
power of this prayer and pray for the intercession
of Our Lady.

“Ah, my children, you must be sure to say your
prayers well, morning and evening. When you cannot do better, say at least an Our Father and a Hail
Mary; but when you have time, say more.”
Our Lady to the Children at La Salette

Fairy Tales
by Jane Spencer

“Someday, you will be old enough to read fairy
tales again.” C.S. Lewis wrote this letter to his
goddaughter; his contemporary, Tolkien, said that
only those with the heart of a child could enter
fairyland, this being the key to all adventures. To
be childlike is the work of a lifetime, and this is
why fairy tales can’t be outgrown. Today, then, I
will try to persuade you to re-visit a land that you
might not have set foot in since you were very
small. Though you have grown, you may find to
your delight that it has grown with you.
Today, firstly, we’ll look at what exactly the
fairytale is; then, I’ll propose three powers that
strengthen the person that breathes the air of
fairyland often. And with a bit of luck, you’ll see
that whether you realize it or not, you’ve been
clinging to the spirit of the fairy tale ever since
you embarked on the perilous road of Christian

warfare.
But let’s begin by getting a clear understanding
of our subject. Most of us owe our notion of fairy
tales not to their original authors—the Brothers
Grimm or Hans Christian Anderson or Andrew
Lang—but to Walt Disney who, even Wikipedia
will admit, “altered gruesome fairy tales in order
to make them more appropriate for children.”
As a result, many of us grew up unaware of
things like the true fate of Cinderella’s
stepsisters; in case you’ve ever had suspicions
that Disney was too easy on them, I’d like to
satisfy your sense of justice with the account of
Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, two researchers in
the 19th century who drew many original fairy
tales from German folklore: “When the wedding
was going to take place, the two false sisters
came…to take part in [Cinderella’s] good
37

Spirituality
fortune. As the bridal party was going to the
church…[a pair of] doves picked out…the eyes of
each of them…And so for their wickedness…they
were punished with blindness for the rest of their
days.”
If you find this version upsetting, I don’t suggest
that you look into the real fate of the Goose Girl’s
unfaithful servant, or the rude dwarf in Snow
White and Rose Red. In fact, you might hesitate
before delving into a book of original fairy tales.
But that would mean you’d also miss some of the
most joyful moments in all of literature, such as
the happy reunion of Rapunzel with her husband
the blind Prince: “He heard a voice which seemed
very familiar to him, and he went towards it.
Rapunzel knew him at once, and fell weeping
upon his neck. Two of her tears fell upon his eyes,
and they immediately grew quite clear, and he
could see as well as ever.”
I’m not claiming that all original fairy tales are
pleasant. Actually many of them are brutal and
graphic…for example, who knew that Snow
White’s stepmother actually wanted to eat Snow
White’s lungs and liver—not just lock her heart in
a golden box. Nevertheless, there’s something
more realistically evil about this version—and
consequently, more realistically joyful about
Snow White’s escape. And as we’ll see, realism is
essential to a fairytale. So, we’ll dismiss Disney’s
work as a corruption in which the princesses and
heroes are sentimental, and the villains’ downfall
undeservedly tame—a mercy which, by the way,
no child watching the film would approve of.
Chesterton remarks that children are “innocent
and love justice; while most of us are wicked and
naturally prefer mercy.”
The true fairyland which we will now examine
is a place of wonder, “wide and deep and high and
filled with many things: all manner of beasts and
birds…shoreless seas and stars uncounted…both
joy and sorrow sharp as swords” (Tolkien). The
definition of a fairy tale, according to Tolkien, is
one which involves a solemn and pure magic…
and essential to the story is its implicit, or
indirect depiction of “moral and religious truth.”
Now that we’ve defined fairy tales, let’s move on
to our second point of examining the three
powers they inspire: Realism, Heroism, and
Romance.
38

The Angelus

March - April 2019

The first of these may come as a shock if you’ve
been thinking of fire-breathing dragons, elves,
and giants. But as Tolkien points out, fairy tales
don’t deal with what can physically happen in our
day-to-day surroundings, but with what the
human heart desires—which is every bit as real
and much more important. Speaking of his own
youth, he confesses: “I desired dragons with a
profound desire.” The fact that our hearts yearn
to encounter the fantastic beasts or the beautiful
heroes of fairy tales suggests that for us, reality
means much more than our material
surroundings. Just as our bodies inhabit a
physical world, our souls inhabit a great spiritual
realm of conflicting forces. And it’s these
forces—the good and the evil—which find their
embodied battlegrounds in the land of the fairies.
This land is, in fact, one of countless miniature
incarnations—in which the story-teller makes
intangible realities like purity, jealousy, malice or
wisdom take flesh so that his audience can better
understand them. Then, when we encounter these
same realities hidden in the more common
occurrences of our daily lives, we know more
clearly how beautiful or hideous they truly are.
That’s why fairy tales, read analogically, are
realistic. By looking through them like a magic
mirror, we see our own lives transformed,
charged with a deeper and more moving
significance than meets the senses. Tolkien
claims that fairy tales offer us an escape from the
materialism of the modern world to the
spirituality which is much more human. “Why
should a man be scorned if, finding himself in
prison, he tries to get out and go home?... The
world outside has not become less real because
the prisoner cannot see it.” Fairy tales are
realistic because they clear our eyes so that we
see the spiritual life beneath every natural
occurrence in our lives.
If the first power of fairy tales enriches our
perceptions of our world, the second translates
into action; Heroism is the power by which we do
great deeds and fight bravely for the good even
when we can’t physically see the scope of the
battle.
St. Paul said that “our wrestling is not against
flesh and blood, but against principalities and
powers.” This is easy to lose sight of in our world,

where the forces of good and evil which surround
us hide themselves under the most common
facades; in other words, our wolves usually seem
like grandmothers, and often, the great prince
looks like nothing but a frog. Consequently, we
easily forget how exciting the battle we fight is,
and our motivation flags.
Here is a modern fairy tale-gone-wrong: Once
upon a time, a hero was accidentally born into an
average 21st-century home. While he longed for
dragons to conquer and a Holy Grail to pursue, he
found himself surrounded by mundane things
like velcro tennis shoes, TV’s, fruit roll-ups, and
plastic toys. True, he was scrupulously shielded
from gruesome fairy tales; these were replaced
by the Cookie Monster, Clifford the Big Red Dog,
Sponge Bob Square-Pants, and Minions. After a
disappointing childhood, this would-be hero
slouched into a mediocre youth, and finally
resigned himself to an adulthood of comfortable

emptiness; like J. Alfred Prufrock, he “measured
out [his] life with coffee spoons,” doing the
ordinary, and nothing but the ordinary.
This is, indeed, a tragedy…not because the hero
isn’t given heroic opportunities, but because he
doesn’t see them right beneath his nose. It
certainly doesn’t help that a materialistic,
sanitized, safety-consumer, but ultimately
downright ugly culture discourages him from
trying to see more than meets the eye. He asks
himself: “If my life is nothing more than these
things which I see, how could I be a hero? Why
should I care to be a hero?”
As we’ve seen, the mind trained by fairy tales
understands that the modern world which he
physically perceives is only the outer crust of a
timeless and dynamic spiritual conflict, a warring
of principalities and powers whose battlefield, as
Dostoyevsky says, is “the human heart.” Surely in
this battle there is motivation for nobility.
39

Spirituality
According to Aristotle, the virtue of magnanimity
comes only with meriting extraordinary honors;
this is exactly what fairy tales make explicit: they
embody the evil as a malicious giant or a livereating witch, who must be faced and slain
courageously. Conversely, the princess who
embodies goodness is so beautiful that one would
die for her in a moment. The mind trained by fairy
tales senses the potency for valor in every
moment. He is motivated to conquer even
commonplace temptations and choose the good.
He embarks on noble quests, and wins success.
This brings us to the final point: the crowning
quality of the fairy tale. To step back for a
moment: first, we saw how they give a realistic
vision, then how they inspire heroic action; now,
we’ll look at the result…the moral of the story.
As Tolkien says, fairy tales are all, at root,
romances. They re-awaken our desire for the
Good by showing just a hint of its true beauty and
great power.
While tragedy is the highest form of human
drama, Tolkien points out that for fairy tales the
case is just the opposite. Tragedies hinge on a
catastrophe: a sudden dire turn of events; in the
realm of fairy tales, however, the rule is what
Tolkien terms eucatastrophe: “the sudden joyous
‘turn’…The joy of the happy ending: or more
correctly of the good catastrophe…is a sudden
and miraculous grace: never to be counted on to
recur. It does not deny the existence…of sorrow
and failure: the possibility of these is necessary
to the joy of deliverance; it denies (in the face of
much evidence, if you will) universal final
defeat…”
We have an instinct for the rules of fairyland—
rules which characterize any romance. For
example, the dragon is always slain. The lovers
are always united in the end. But we also know
that these rules seem to lose their strength in our
day-to-day struggles on this earth; and when,
outside of the gates of fairyland, we see lost
kingdoms, broken hearts, and the triumph of evil
men, we lose our confidence. It is in these
moments that a belief in fairy tales—in the
essence of the fairy tale—is profoundly
necessary, and very realistic. We call it the virtue
of hope. By it we trust that the great Lover whose
image fairy tales merely reflect will ultimately
40

The Angelus

March - April 2019

win; that He will overcome the Dragon.
As Tolkien says, the happy ending of the fairy
tale is “a sudden glimpse of the underlying
reality…It is not only a ‘consolation’ for the
sorrow of this world, but a satisfaction, and an
answer to that question, ‘Is it true?’”
In conclusion, we’ve seen that original fairy
tales are realistic, inspiring, and always
romances. On the next rainy day when you don’t
have much to do, you might dust off that old
childhood book, and refresh yourself. Tolkien
loved to discuss these stories with his friend C.S.
Lewis, who went so far as to view the entire
history of Christianity as the prototype of all
fairy tales. Just as the author of a fairy tale
expresses truths with what we would call
fantastic characters, Lewis says that
“Christianity is God expressing Himself through
what we call ‘real things.’” And in case you’re
wondering if this greatest, truest story will have
a eucatastrophe, it is foretold in the book of the
Apocalypse: “I saw a great multitude…standing
before the throne…in the sight of the Lamb…
These are they who are come out of great
tribulation, and have washed their robes, and
have made them white in the blood of the Lamb…
They shall no more hunger nor thirst…for the
Lamb…shall lead them to the fountains of the
water of life, and God shall wipe away all tears
from their eyes.”

The
First Masses
in Australia at

Botany
Bay
by Frank Carleton

On Saturday January 26, 1788, the two ships
of the Lapérouse Expedition entered Botany Bay.
They exchanged courtesies with the departing
vessels of the British First Fleet then en route to
Sydney Cove whence the first British settlement
was being transferred. The French vessels anchored
near the north headland of Botany Bay. Each ship
carried a priest doing the duties of both chaplain
and scientific savant. Aboard Lapérouse’s ship, the
Boussole was the Abbé Jean-André Mongez (17511788?), canon of St. Genevieve in Paris who enjoyed
a published scientific reputation in ornithology,
entomology and chemistry. Aboard the second
ship, the Astrolabe, was a conventual Franciscan
friar, Père Claude-François-Joseph Receveur (17571788) whose name in religion was Laurent. He was
a naturalist who had read a number of papers to
the Académie des Sciences at whose behest he

was appointed to the expedition. His specialty
was geology, especially volcanic phenomena and
during the voyage he collected geological and
mineralogical specimens. His order’s members
were known as cordeliers from the cord girdle with
three knots they wore about their grey habits. Since
1788, Père Receveur’s grave on the north headland
of Botany Bay has recalled the lengthy local stay
of the Lapérouse Expedition before it sailed into
oblivion.

Two Priests for the Task
The appointment of two priests to the Lapérouse
Expedition was consequent upon a letter of the
21st of April, 1785 from Lapérouse to the Director
of Naval Ports and Arsenals while the expedition
41

Spirituality
was fitting out at Brest. He sought a priest “able
to say Mass for us and to have talent” meaning
scientific talent. Two ships required a priest for
each vessel. The religious duties of chaplains in the
royal navy of the Ancien Régime were specified in
a copious royal Ordonnance concerning the Marine
of 1765 which laid down the duties of all types of
naval personnel. The chaplain (aumônier) of a
naval vessel was obliged to lead daily morning and
evening prayer in an audible voice with the crew
kneeling. Public prayers like the Angelus were

the chaplain was required to explain familiarly in
French the Epistle and the Gospel of the Sunday or
the feast.
Sunday January 27th, the day after the
expedition’s arrival in Botany Bay was Sexagesima,
the first of seven Sundays during the expedition’s
stay. Up to February 17th, the day of Père
Receveur’s death, there were 13 feast days, three of
which fell on Sundays.
The two priests of the Lapérouse Expedition
introduced the traditional Latin Mass of the
Roman rite to Australia in early 1788 by reason of
the obligation binding on French naval chaplains
to say Mass on Sundays and feast days. And
the Masses said by the Abbe Mongez after Père
Receveur’s death from the February 18th to March
10th add to the total number said at Botany Bay.
Masses on four Sundays and seven following feasts
including St. Peter’s Chair at Antioch (February
22nd), St. Mathias Apostle (February 24th), St.
Thomas Aquinas (March 7th) can be presumed. It
is reasonable to conclude that well over 30 Masses
were said at Botany Bay by both priests during the
Lapérouse Expedition’s lengthy Botany Bay sojourn.
They first brought the Mass to Australia.

The Liturgical Arrangements

announced before each meal by the ship’s bell. Mass
was to be said on Sundays and feast days without
exception unless bad weather prevented it and on
other days as often as possible. This obligation was
of obvious crucial importance for the inception
of the Mass in New Holland during the Lapérouse
Expedition’s Botany Bay sojourn from January 26 March 10, 1788.
Amongst a miscellany of Lapérouse and
associated papers in the Mitchell Library in Sydney
is a billet de demande [requisition] dated July 8,
1785 which requests the provision of a ship’s chapel
and its contents for a four-year voyage aboard the
Boussole. When a naval chaplain took the Blessed
Sacrament from such a location to the sick, the crew
knelt with their heads bare. At least once a week
42

The Angelus

March - April 2019

The liturgical practice of the Navy of the Ancien
Régime was for an altar to be erected on the
poop deck (sur la dunette) and for the crew to
be assembled below it by a drum beat, “battre la
Messe” repeated three times. The ship’s colours
would be lowered three times at each of the
elevations of the Host and the chalice when drums
beat a general salute. In 1964, an altar stone in four
composite fragments with its five consecration
crosses, still clearly defined, was recovered from
the wreck of the Boussole at Vanikoro in the
Solomon Islands where the two ships foundered in
a hurricane within weeks of departing Botany Bay.
This sacred artifact was placed on display in the
Lapérouse Museum at La Perouse on Botany Bay
at its opening in February, 1988 but returned to the
Musee de la Marine in Paris in 2008 for a permanent
Lapérouse voyage display from 2016.
Upon arrival, local security was uppermost
in Lapérouse’s mind in the light of recent tragic

experiences, he had received orders in the course
of the voyage to reconnaître [figure out] what
the British were doing at Botany Bay as a matter
of naval and political intelligence. It was also
necessary to assemble two longboats from prefabricated parts to replace those lost at Maouna
(now Tutuila) in the Navigators Islands (present
day Samoa) in the murderous affray of December
6, 1787. On that occasion, the Vicomte Fleuriot de
Langle, commander of the Astrolabe, and 11 other
men were brutally massacred while another 10,
including Père Receveur, were wounded and two
French longboats destroyed. Therefore, at Botany
Bay, the French established a fortified encampment
and planted a garden which survived in a wild
state for many years afterwards. Tents, including
one equipped as an observatory for astronomical
observations, were set up within a stockade
defended by two small cannons and a ditch.
During this period, there was a succession of
11 cordial visits by British parties to the French at
Botany Bay and by French parties to Sydney Cove
over land and by sea. As Surgeon Worgan wrote in
terms similar to other British First Fleet writers:
“… there was a constant succession of mutual good
offices passing between us. We visited each other
frequently, sometimes the parties going by water,
sometimes by land (for it is only 8 to 10 miles over)
and the little difficulties and fatigues which the
voyagers or the travellers underwent were thought
amply compensated if they could obtain social
exchange with one another.”

The First Two Masses
The first two Masses would have occurred either
on the day of arrival, the feast of St. Polycarp or
the next day, Sexagesima. It may be inferred that
Mass was only said aboard the two ships by their
respective chaplains during the course of the
voyage. Nor does Lapérouse’s journal record the
expedition’s officers, scientific savants and men
ever attending Mass ashore when they landed in
Catholic countries. Not at Concepcion in Chile
(February 24 – March 15, 1786), nor at Monterey in
California (September 15 - 22, 1786) nor at Manila
in the Philippines (February 29 – April 9, 1787),
all Spanish possessions, nor in Portuguese Macao

(January 3 - February 5, 1787). Considerations
of security, logistics and personnel deployment
would have been paramount at Botany Bay. The
notion of landing either or both ships’ crews for
Mass in an insecure location at Botany Bay was
absurd. The two ships there carried over 170 men
comprising officers, crew and scientific savants.
And the vessels’ safety and security would have
required some personnel to remain on board in any
circumstance.
The occasion and circumstances of Père
Receveur’s death on February 17, 1788 remain a
mystery. It has sometimes been supposed that
he died as the result of wounds sustained in the
murderous December 1787 affray on Maouna which
he escaped by swimming offshore. But this is
highly improbable for, 12 days before the priest’s
death, Lapérouse wrote to the Minister of Marine:
“We reached Botany Bay without a single case of
sickness in either vessel.” The possibility of sudden
violent death must be considered. Earlier in the
voyage Lapérouse had described Père Receveur as
“an intrepid naturalist who went ashore at every
opportunity to collect geological specimens.” Did
he stray alone too far along the shore of Botany Bay
away from the French encampment and encounter
a hostile aboriginal ambush? On February 21st,
four days after Père Receveur’s death, Lieutenant
William Bradley wrote: “Some of the officers of
the Boussole came from Botany Bay to visit the
governor. They inform us that the natives are
exceedingly troublesome there and that whenever
they meet an unarmed man they attack him.”
Père Receveur’s grave received its Latin epigraph
which translates: “Here lies L. Receveur from the
Friars Minor, Priest of France, scientist in the
circumnavigation of the world under the leadership
of Lapérouse, Died February 17th in the year 1788.”
This grave on the north side headland of Botany Bay
has recalled the earliest contact between France
and Australia and the inception of the Mass during
the first weeks of the British settlement. Every
year on the Sunday closest to the February 17th
anniversary of Père Receveur’s death occurs the
annual Père Receveur Commemoration: Mass in the
same rite used by the two priests of the Lapérouse
Expedition celebrated on the verandah of the La
Perouse Museum near Père Receveur’s grave by a
priest of the Society of Saint Pius X.
43

95 pp.–Softcover–STK# 8012–$7.95

136 pp. – Color Softcover – STK# 8725 – $12.95

From the
Rose Garden of
Our Lady

The Rosary With
Archbishop
Lefebvre

Hear me and understand well, my little son, that
nothing should frighten or grieve you. Let not your
heart be disturbed. Do not fear this sickness, nor
any other sickness or anguish. Am I not here, who
is your Mother?

If you are seeking a better understanding of the
Rosary, to integrate this prayer into your daily
schedule, or to develop a deeper level of Faith
through the study of its mysteries, this book is
for you.

This book contains a beautiful line illustration of
each mystery with several paragraphs from the
Gospels (or a Father of the Church) followed by
10 profound mini-meditations.

Visit www.angeluspress.org — 1-800-966-7337
Please visit our website to see our entire selection of books and music.

Spirituality

Build Me
a Temple
by a Benedictine monk

In his Rule, St. Benedict speaks of the Oratory of
the Monastery as the sacred place of prayer where
the monk is called seven times a day and once at
night to offer to God the sacrifice of praise. He
calls it a place where the soul can go and contact
God in secret: “Let the Oratory be what its name
implies, and let nothing else be done or kept there
...if anyone wish to pray secretly, let him just go in
and pray: not in a loud voice, but with tears and
fervor of heart” (Ch. 52). His great respect for the
sacred asks that his monks reserve the Oratory
exclusively for God and all that pertains to God.
In the various apparitions of the Blessed Virgin
Mary throughout history, she almost always
asks for the building of a temple on the site of
the apparition. The temple would start as a very
modest construction that often would grow to
become a major basilica. This is perhaps an
46

The Angelus

March - April 2019

image of our souls becoming a temple of God.
The dignity of the human soul is to become the
dwelling place of God Himself. In this spiritual
temple, where the sacrifice of praise is offered
on the altar of our hearts, the Catholic Church is
represented in all of its vitality. Our souls really
do reflect the qualities of the Church, the dwelling
place of God with men.
The Church is essentially the kingdom of Our
Lord Jesus Christ. The Gospel of St. Luke reminds
us that the kingdom of God is within us. A soul
in the state of grace is truly the kingdom where
God reigns. “The Lord will give him the throne of
David his father, and he will reign over the house
of Jacob forever” (Lk. 1:32). Our souls were created
to reflect this happy kingdom, which is one of truth
and goodness, where God must reign over our
intelligence and our will.

The soul must be a kingdom of truth. Our
thoughts must be in perfect conformity with
God’s thoughts. He says in scripture that He is the
truth. Any thought contrary to truth, or one that is
deceitful or lying is a thought opposed to God and
as such must be banned from the kingdom of our
soul. The corruption of the world is overwhelming
and unfortunately, we are often attracted to the
deceitfulness of the lying world. Our Lord tells
us to have confidence because He has overcome
the world, but how did He conquer the world? His
conquest was one of truth over the iniquity of lies.
“... For this came I into the world, that I should
give testimony to the truth. Everyone that is of
the truth hears my voice.” We too can overcome
the deceits of this world by listening to the truth.
Good thoughts come from God and, as such, will
never die. One good thought of a child of God is
of greater value than the entire material universe
because it is of the spiritual realm. It will always
triumph over evil because a certain presence of
God is found in truth, which will always overcome
the lies of the world, the flesh and the devil.
Our soul must also become the kingdom of
goodness, the only object of our desires. In the
Kingdom of God there can be no evil, no impurity,
no hatred, no jealousy, absolutely nothing that
can injure the love of God and neighbor. In this
kingdom, our will must be attached to the will of
God and everything that pleases Him. In the purity

of our heart, our love of God and neighbor is what
pleases God the most. Jesus tells us that this great
law of charity is upon what the prophets and the
law depend.
In this kingdom of our soul, Our Lord is the true
King by the very fact that He created our soul and
through His Passion and death He “re-possesses”
it by a true conquest. There is only one condition
that this King obliges His subjects to embrace
before He will reign in the interior of their hearts.
He asks us to freely choose Him, to open the doors
of our minds and our hearts to welcome Him into
His kingdom. He asks us to think of pure and good
thoughts, to live in the perfect bond of charity by
loving God and neighbor. If we refuse to seek after
truth and goodness, we will choose iniquity and
live a life of hatred. “...He that loveth iniquity hateth
his own soul” (Ps. 10).
If we are faithful to maintain our thoughts and
love submitted to God, we will accomplish what the
Blessed Virgin Mary asks in all of her apparitions:
“Build me a temple.” The same thought is echoed
by St. Benedict: “Let the Oratory be what its name
implies, and let nothing else be done or kept there
...if anyone wish to pray secretly, let him just go in
and pray: not in a loud voice, but with tears and
fervor of heart” (Ch. 52). May this oratory be the
image of our souls where God is kept and His holy
will accomplished, and where we can secretly enter
and pray to our true King, Jesus Christ.
47

Christian Culture

A Marian
Catechism
in Music
The Ave Maria by Josquin Desprez

by Dr. Andrew Childs

Ad Jesum per Mariam. This axiom of elegant
simplicity and ultimate power stands as a
supreme consolation to Catholics and a sobering
rebuke to those who refuse Catholic Mariology.
To dismiss the critical role the Blessed Virgin
Mary plays in the plan of salvation represents
not only a separation from Catholic doctrine, but
from any reasonable conception of Christianity.
The enemies of the Church deride as misty
speculative theology the idea that the one chosen
by God as His portal to humanity will also serve
as humanity’s gate to Heaven; this is in fact a
matter of simple sense. For those outside the
Church who would claim to believe in the Blessed
Trinity, the denial of her primacy implies a denial
of His divinity: Christ as God made man is made
of her flesh, and His extension of unique and
powerful privilege to her could not reasonably
48

The Angelus

March - April 2019

have ended abruptly with His birth. As St.
Bernard recalls to us:
“God, I repeat, to whom the angels are subject,
whom the Principalities and Powers do obey,
was subject to Mary; and not only to Mary, but to
Joseph also for Mary’s sake. Marvel, therefore,
both at God and man, and choose that which
giveth greater wonder, whether it be the most
loving condescension of the Son, or the exceeding
great dignity of His Mother. Both amaze us, both
are marvelous. That God should obey a woman
is lowliness without parallel; that woman should
rule over God, an elevation beyond comparison.”

On the Importance of the Work
What follows will not debate the veracity or

particulars of any Marian apparition, though
it seems unlikely that the Mother of God, after
having cooperated so completely with the plan of
salvation by bringing a divine Son into the world
to be crucified before her eyes in reparation to
her divine Spouse for the sins of mankind, would
after the fact fail to manifest herself on occasion
to men in tangible ways. Rather, this brief
consideration will explore a supreme musical
expression of Marian devotion, the Ave Maria by
Josquin Desprez (c.1440-1521). Speaking generally,
great composers—historically important
composers—tend either to innovate (think
Beethoven), or to perfect (think Mozart). Without
embarking on too technical an explanation of his
importance, Josquin’s work represents perhaps
the crucial link between the melismatic modality
of the pre-Renaissance, and the text-driven,
harmonically motivated polyphony of the preBaroque—put simply, the technical and stylistic
bridge connecting Dufay and Ockeghem with
Palestrina.
Renaissance musicologist Gustave Reese
states, “That Josquin was the greatest
composer of the high Renaissance, the most
varied in invention and the most profound in
expression, has become almost a commonplace
of musical history.” Though now lesser-known
than Palestrina (1525-1594), scholars and
performers at the time of his death considered
him as important to music as they did Virgil
to literature and Michelangelo to art. Widely
published, disseminated, and emulated over a
compositional career spanning nearly 60 years,
one contemporary critic half-jokingly speculated,
“now that Josquin is dead, he is putting out more
works than when he was still alive.” Martin
Luther, proving ultimately a better judge of
musical quality than a Master of Theology, said
of him, “Josquin is a master of the notes, which
must express what he desires; on the other hand,
other composers must do as the notes will.”
Mystery surrounds his early life. Born
somewhere in northern France—perhaps near
Condé-sur-l’Escaut, midway between Paris
and Brussels—sometime around 1440, he first
appears on a roster of singers for the Milan
Cathedral listed as a “biscantor”—or adult singer
rather than a choirboy—in 1459. In the service of

Ascanio Cardinal Sforza, he appears on the roster
of the papal chapel choir through the 1490’s. He
worked in France, once composing a motet for
King Louis XII, Memor esto verbi servo tuo,
“Remember thy word to thy servant,” to remind
the King of a promised but forgotten benefice (the

King immediately honored his commitment). He
worked briefly in Ferarra but forfeited his job to
Jacob Obrecht—an important composer in his
own right—when plague broke out (Obrecht died
of the plague in 1505). He spent his remaining
years as provost of the church of Notre Dame in
Condé-sur-l’Escaut.
The Ave Maria crowns the middle period of
Josquin’s compositional career, written likely
sometime before 1490. Catechetical, meditative,
and stylistically integrated, the motet, in
seven sections, makes a concise yet profound
examination of five crucial episodes in the life of
Our Lady: her Conception, birth, Annunciation,
Purification, and Assumption. Each episode
manifests some aspect of her unique privilege
as spouse of the Holy Ghost and Theotokos,
and Josquin provides distinct music for each
49

Christian Culture
section, in terms of texture, counterpoint,
rhythmic complexity, and meter. The supplication
that closes the piece remains one of the
most profound and starkly beautiful musical
utterances ever composed.

Angelic Salutation—“Hail,
Mary, Full of Grace, the Lord
is with Thee, Serene Virgin”
The initial melodic fragment is a study in
reverence and humility, perfectly outlining
both the word stresses in its rising-then-falling
contour, and the C-major tonality. In the first
phrase, “Ave Maria, Gratia plena,” each voice,
from highest to lowest, restates the phrase in
its own range creating a marvelous effect of
gentle descent and arrival. The voices overlap
so subtly that each remains distinct, delivering
the individual salutation in turn. Immediately,
the second phrase begins in the soprano, the
first half of the second line of the text, “gratia
plena,” overlapping the final initial utterance of
the bass. Josquin reverses the shape of the initial
melodic fragment here—falling-then-rising—
creating a perfectly rounded pair of phrases.
The music of the second line of the couplet
imitates the melodic fragments of the opening
line, but with a flourish of rhythmic complexity
and playful contrapuntal interplay between the
voices that seems to indicate the delight of the
angelic messenger. The bass alone maintains a
staid composure and restores order to close this
wondrous opening section by gently guiding the
other three voices to the final C-major cadence.

“Hail to Her, Whose
Conception, Full of Solemn
Jubilation Fills Heaven and
Earth with New Joy”
The texts of the five strophes consist of
pairs of rhyming couplets. Josquin immediately
changes texture, from the strict imitation of
the opening salutation, to duets between the
50

The Angelus

March - April 2019

upper and lower voices on the rising-then-falling
melodic phrase “Ave cujus conceptio.” The subtle
but delightful rhythmic variation between the
duet partners underscores the individuality of
the voices. After the two-measure soprano and
alto duet, the tenor and bass would seem to have
their turn, but after only half a measure, the alto
immediately joins in, descending below the tenor
as if attempting to escape detection in the duet
turned trio. Finally, Josquin brings all the voices
together at “solemni plena gaudia,” in a robust
celebration of tightly overlapping and imitative
lines, each with its own rhythmic interest.

“Hail to Her Whose Birth
Was our Solemn Feast, Like
the Morning Star Rising,
Foretelling the True Sun”
Summarizing the procedures employed so far,
Josquin returns initially to the duet texture and
echoes the melody of the Salutation. The pairs of
voices—soprano and alto, tenor and bass—now
finish each other’s phrases in the first line, while
in the second line reverting to the pattern of
descending sequential entrances. The stability
of this section highlights the clear textual
opposition and wordplay between the “lucifer” of
the morning sun, and the True “Sun.”

“Hail, Pious Humility,
Fruitful Without a Man,
Whose Annunciation
Was Our Salvation”
The text underscores the fact that no
distinction exists between the person of the
Blessed Virgin and her virtues; she who refers
to herself as the Immaculate Conception the
poet addresses as pious humility. Here, Josquin
employs the duet texture scrupulously and in
perfect accord with the text: the soprano and alto
sing “Hail, pious humility,” trading the rhythmic
variations of the first strophe, and “untouched” by
the pair of men’s voices who sing “fruitful without

a man” with great respect (and perhaps the
slightest hint of mirthful irony). They repeat this
procedure with the phrases “cujus annunciatio,”
and “nostra fuit salvatio.” An additional half bar
at the final cadence provides enhanced stability,
in preparation for the breathtaking metrical shift
about to occur.

“Hail, True Virginity,
Immaculate Chastity, Whose
Purification Purged Our Sins”
We reach the poetic and musical heart of the
masterpiece. Until now, Josquin has employed
a duple meter, referred to as “imperfect” in
medieval and early Renaissance music theory. As
the poet addresses Our Lady as “true virginity,
immaculate chastity,” Josquin shifts seamlessly
to triple, or “perfect” meter, barely perceptible if
the performers maintain the proper Renaissance
metrical relationship, where the pulse of the
duple half bar equals the whole triple bar
(half-note=dotted-half-note). This relationship
enlivens the triple meter in a marvelous way,
increasing the relative speed of the “small” beats
(now a 3:2 ratio), creating an exciting sense of
increased forward momentum, while maintaining
the stability of the constant “big” beat pulse
(conducting equal quarter-notes destroys this
effect, proportionally slowing the triple meter).
The tenor, delayed by a single small beat on each
entrance, heightens the full texture, allowing for
a continuous reinforcement of the word stress by
way of an echo effect. For the astute listener or
performer, Josquin embeds a cadential hemiola,
one final magnificent layer of rhythmic detail and
vitality. The entire section soars, radiating love
and joy.

“Hail, Most Excellent
in All Angelic Virtues,
Whose Assumption Was
Our Glorification”
The alto lingers an extra bar, repeating the
word “purgatio” of the previous strophe. This

serves both to underscore the importance of
the theological concept, and to allow a single
voice to navigate the return of the duple meter
(the effect feels something like exiting a moving
walkway). Josquin again employs a combination
of procedures, melodic imitation and paired
entrances of upper and lower voices. Once again,
the duet teams repeat rather than complete each
other’s phrases, lending a sense of rhetorical
relaxation; the music seems to taper to the close
as the soprano drops out for the final phrase, a
rhythmically dazzling though melodically and
dynamically subdued trio for alto, tenor, and
bass which ends in hushed reverence on an open
cadence, one lacking the emotional definition of a
major or minor third.

Supplication—“O Mother
of God, Remember Me”
The piece has ended; so definitely, that
Josquin indicates a half bar of silence. What
follows transcends all that has preceded it,
which structurally, rhetorically, and musically
is essentially perfect. For the final supplication,
complete in itself, Josquin strips all art away.
Stylistically, he disappears completely, and these
few bars echo—as Gregorian chant does—
immortality, no longer bound by any recognizable
marks of chronological identification. A bare
altar of petition remains, the soul with direct,
humble, and confident recourse to the Theotokos.
Josquin employs a near-perfect homophonic
texture, seemingly incongruous after the
subdued virtuosity of the motet, yet fitting given
the petition: “O mother of God”—the bass and
tenor give the slightest rhythmic hint of disquiet,
perhaps a remembrance of things past which
have made imploring the aid of the Mediatrix
so necessary—“remember me”—the alto, with
the humble confidence of one who hopes, alters
her line, dipping from the fifth to the third
scale degree, allowing for a stunning ascending
passing tone, highlighting the word “mei.” The
final open cadential “Amen” puts the piece to rest
and the soul at peace, as the final vision of the
Immaculate fades into the dream of Heaven.
Mother of God, remember me. Amen.
51

Remember,
O most chaste spouse
of the Virgin Mary, that
never was it known that
anyone who implored your
help and sought your
intercession was left
unassisted.
Full of confidence
in your power, I fly unto
you and beg your protection.
Despise not, O Guardian
of the Redeemer, my humble
supplication, but in your bounty,
hear and answer me.
Amen.

Christian Culture

Eastern Marian Apparitions

“Orthodoxy”
and the West
by John Rao, PhD

Marian devotion is a hallmark of Eastern
Christianity, as anyone who has entered into one
of its churches and seen the central role played
therein by the holy icons of the Theotokos can
testify. It is, therefore, no surprise that believers
who pray before these images on a regular
basis would turn to them for miraculous aid
in times of danger. Perhaps the most famous
of such calls for help took place in 622, when
the Patriarch Sergius, serving as regent in the
absence of the Emperor and the imperial army,
processed around the walls of Constantinople
with a beloved Marian icon to save the city from a
deadly Avar invasion.
Eastern apparitions of the Mother of God are
also not unknown. Russians believe that Mary
visited both Sergius of Radonezh (1314-1392)
as well as the man whom he blessed to lead
54

The Angelus

March - April 2019

the fight against the Tatars, Dmitri Donskoy
(1350-1389), the Grand Prince of Moscow. But
here, too, her most renowned appearance was
in Constantinople, in 911. This is reputed to
have taken place during another threatening
invasion, at the Church of Blachernae, where
Mary’s robe, veil, and part of her belt, transported
from Palestine in the 5th century, had long been
venerated. The following description of what gave
birth to the Feast of the Protection of the Most
Holy Theotokos, celebrated by Eastern Christians
annually on October 1st, comes from the website
of the Orthodox Church in America:
“On Sunday, October 1, during the All Night
Vigil, when the church was overflowing with
those at prayer, the fool-for-Christ St. Andrew
(October 2), at the fourth hour, lifted up his
eyes towards the heavens and beheld our most

Holy Lady Theotokos coming through the air,
resplendent with heavenly light and surrounded
by an assembly of the saints. St. John the Baptist
and the holy apostle John the Theologian
accompanied the Queen of Heaven. On bended
knees, the Most Holy Virgin tearfully prayed for
Christians for a long time. Then, coming near the
Bishop’s Throne, she continued her prayer.
After completing her prayer, she took her veil
and spread it over the people praying in church,
protecting them from enemies both visible
and invisible. The Most Holy Lady Theotokos
was resplendent with heavenly glory, and the
protecting veil in her hands gleamed “more
than the rays of the sun.” St. Andrew gazed
trembling at the miraculous vision and he asked
his disciple, the blessed Epiphanius standing

beside him, “Do you see, brother, the Holy
Theotokos, praying for all the world?” Epiphanius
answered, “I do see, holy Father, and I am in
awe.”
The ever-blessed Mother of God implored the
Lord Jesus Christ to accept the prayers of all the
people calling on His Most Holy Name, and to
respond speedily to her intercession, “O Heavenly
King, accept all those who pray to You and call on
my name for help. Do not let them go away from
my icon unheard.”

Serious Recognition of Mary
Given such serious recognition of the reality
of Marian apparitions in the East, what can
55

Christian Culture
we say about the reaction of easterners to those
claimed to have occurred in western, Roman
Catholic lands? The answer to this question
depends upon what one means by oriental
Christians. There are, of course, many of these in
union with Rome who not only honor the Feast
of the Protection of the Most Holy Theotokos,
but also publicly accept what the Latin Church
approves with respect to Marian apparitions
in the West. But then we have to consider the
“Eastern Orthodox,” who, except for rare, brief,
and brittle intervals, have officially been at odds
with the Holy See since 1053. And here a basic
existential problem emerges.
The difficulty lies in the fact that there
are numerous “Eastern Orthodoxies,” both
historically and in contemporary life, with
considerable differences among their members,
particularly with respect to judgments regarding
developments in the Latin Church and how to
respond to them. Where Mary is concerned, it is
certainly the case that there is a general “Eastern
Orthodox” rejection of the two modern Roman
pronouncements concerning the Mother of
God—the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception
and the Assumption—although often on the
basis of arguments that “reach” for grounds for
an opposition that might otherwise not have
been offered if the pope had not been centrally
involved in proclaiming them.
On the other hand, there are, historically, a
considerable number of important Orthodox
thinkers who are much more in agreement with
the Latin Church on a variety of theological
questions than with what is today presented
as dogmatic by the most vociferous defenders
of “Eastern Orthodoxy.” One can see this by
examining everything from the debates at
the 15th-century Council of Florence over
apparent points of disagreement to centurylong discussions of the reception or rejection
of the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas and
the spirituality of St. Francis of Assisi. Most
importantly, the reality of eastern division is
apparent with respect to the writings of the
“neptic” or “watchful fathers,” transmitted in
the 18th century by the collection of texts called
the Philokalia, and associated with the quietist
and anti-intellectual practices of hesychasm, as
56

The Angelus

March - April 2019

most vigorously promoted by Gregory of Palamas
(1296-1359). Readers interested in learning more
about these writings, the spirituality connected
with it, and their consequences can look back to
a previous article that I wrote on this subject in
The Angelus (“World War One and the Russian
Diaspora: Spread of Truths and Errors” MarchApril 2018).

Hostility Toward Catholicism
The most clearly formulated hostility to things
western, at least in my own experience, can be
found in the “orthodox” arguments coming from
Russian, post-revolutionary Russian expatriate,
and Russian-influenced western convert
communities and activists. But who in the
“Eastern Orthodox” world can decide whether
they or some of their more western-friendly
co-religionists are correct? That community
possesses no universally accepted machinery for
settling disputes about such matters, with some
easterners even still insisting that there can be no
ecumenical council to resolve disputes without
an emperor to preside over it.
What this all means, when translated into
an investigation into the “Eastern Orthodox”
attitude towards Marian apparitions in the life of
the Roman Catholic Church, is that one has to be
careful in distinguishing the sources consulted.
Are they based upon the Christian spirit of
ordinary pious men and women? Are they steeped
primarily in the teachings of the first Ecumenical
Councils and in the writings of the Fathers of
the Church recognized by all easterners? Are
they expressions of opinions chiefly shaped by
irritation with papal involvement in approving
and interpreting the apparitions in question? Or
are the judgments that are made the product of
the anti-intellectual, quietist spirituality of the
Philokalia, hesychasm, and the 19th century
Russian mystical tradition that emerged from
them and has now won for itself a western-wide
clientele?
Having put the reader on warning about these
difficulties, let me now note that the answer to
the question “what do the ‘Eastern Orthodox’
think?” about western Marian apparitions is

“everything imaginable.” Articles regarding such
apparitions from official and popular sources
that are readily available on the internet show
that many of our “orthodox” separated brethren
share the same concerns that we do regarding
the potential for deluded or manipulative claims
of visitations by the Mother of God—with
Medjugorje as the current prime example of that
critique—but are often greatly attracted to the
western pilgrimage sites at Lourdes and Fatima.
Bernadette and the children in Portugal are
frequently appreciated for their innocence, which
is taken as a sign of the truth of what they saw,
and the spirit of repentance evoked by the Fatima
message wins it approval in circles that admit
that “something” of divine origin did indeed
happen there. In fact, there are even attempts to
give to these apparitions an eastern twist, as, for
example, in a rather friendly article by an English
convert to Orthodoxy, who says that “when
Bernadette was asked about the exact outward
appearance of the Mother of God and was
shown a catalogue of images, she innocently, but
truthfully at once chose not the resemblance of a
Roman Catholic statue, but that of an Orthodox
icon.”

Objections to Marian Dogmas
Objections arise regarding whatever ties them
with “unacceptable” Roman teachings and papal
politics. Hence, the association of Lourdes with
the recently proclaimed dogma of the Immaculate
Conception is interpreted by those friendly to the
apparition as a distortion of the original vision
and by the more hostile as discrediting it entirely.
Fatima, with its call for the consecration and
conversion of a Russia which is now viewed by
fervent “orthodox” as herself the only hope for
the salvation of an atheistic and libertine West,
arouses still more criticism, chastised as selfcondemned for Russophobia or lamented as a
victim of kidnapping by the papacy to support its
never-ending hunt for Roman hegemony.
Just how vociferous the critique can be,
especially from Russian-influenced sources,
is illustrated by a widely read and extensively
commented upon article of a convert from

Anglicanism by the name of Miriam Lambouras
entitled: “The Marian Apparitions: Divine
Intervention or Delusion?” (orthodoxinfo.com/
inquirers/marian_apparitions.aspx). Here, amidst
totally legitimate questions regarding the validity
and politicization of certain visions—once again,
especially that of Medjugorje—one encounters
what can often be found elsewhere in “orthodox”
arguments: a seeming blindness to the incredibly
political and national parochialism prevalent
in much of the eastern world, and a “reaching”
for arguments to show how western spirituality
perversely differs from eastern beliefs and
practices that a more friendly eye might think to
be similar. Worst of all is the author’s willingness
to call up classical naturalist Enlightenment
arguments to try to equate Marian devotion in the
West to ancient, pagan “Mother Goddess” worship
or psychological disturbances that can all too
readily be turned to crush Russian “Orthodoxy”
as well.
Western converts from Roman Catholicism
influenced by Russian “Orthodoxy” are very
much in the public religious eye in our time,
Rod Dreher chief among them. Given the everwider knowledge of contemporary scandals in
the Latin Church, the danger of their attracting
other Catholics to join them is great. It is this that
makes it necessary to put the faithful on warning
regarding what may or may not lie behind the
arguments put forward by them. The “gut feeling”
of many Eastern Orthodox believers is that the
western Marian apparitions are true, and that
“temptation” is a major and open reason why
articles seeking to discredit them are written.
The “gut feeling” comes from the true heart of
the brilliant Eastern Christian tradition that the
Universal Church as a whole must appreciate.
The critique, many legitimate and generally
discussed issues aside, leads, ultimately to a
different kind of “orthodoxy” than that of the
Eastern Church Fathers we all share in common;
one that denigrates speculative theology as a
purely Latin corruption, leading men and women
into a quietist, spiritual “black hole.” And going
that pathway truly might lead people to delusion
by a Mother Goddess rather than enlightenment
by the Virgin.

57

Christian Culture

The
Family
Meal
by the Sisters of the Society of Saint Pius X

Seven o’clock: Kevin, 11 years old, comes
home. The apartment is empty, Dad and Mom are
still working. He opens the freezer, chooses an
ice-cream cone that he inhales, then sits down in
front of his Play Station while munching peanuts.
It is only proper that he lifts his gaze from his
game that he is absorbed in when his mother
finally comes home; she is tired from her day,
heats up some tea, and crunches an apple before
looking at a magazine.
This same evening, in a neighboring
apartment, Vianney has already been home for
nearly two hours. Mother was there to welcome
him, to listen to his stories from school, and help
him with his homework. When Father returns,
he sits down with the other members of the
family to steaming pumpkin soup that follows an
appetizing casserole of vegetables with bacon.
58

The Angelus

March - April 2019

Here in a few words are two instances of daily
family life...almost two separate civilizations.
And without hesitation, we have chosen the
veritable family life, the one where parents and
children are found together around the table for
meals.
Why is it important not to leave the children
alone to eat at their leisure? A first reason is the
health of the child. There is a good bet that, left
to himself, he will choose pizza and cookies in
preference to salad and green beans...and too bad
for the balance that does not allow self-service in
the refrigerator.
At a higher level, the family meal is also an
excellent instructor of the will.
One practices life skills there; it is a school
of self-control. One learns to eat what is served
without arguing, instead of leaving free reign

to his caprices to choose what flatters his tastes.
Certainly, it is not forbidden to have preferences
in food, while learning to still eat that which
is less pleasing. What a lovely opportunity to
“make a sacrifice!” Thus, the “animal” part of
oneself gives way little by little to reason and the
life of grace. It is for this reason that snacking
between meals is not encouraged (snack time for
the little children is considered as a meal). Only
the mother has the right to open the refrigerator,
in order to make a meal for everyone. If not, it
invites the reign of capricious instincts, unworthy
of a child of God.
Finally, there is a third reason that the meal
is a strong time of family unity. Everyone is
there sharing the discoveries, adventures, or
the difficulties of the day. It is up to the father
and the mother to watch over the conversation

in order that it remains charitable, instructive,
or recreational, but never evil or pessimistic.
Because a family is not a sum of juxtaposed
individuals, it is a living organism, where
everyone gives of themselves for the happiness
of everyone. Yes, it is quite the opposite of
individualism, promoted by the example given in
the beginning of this article. At table, characters
show themselves and rub against each other,
so many occasions “to educate,” that is to say
to raise the souls of our children, by judicious
remarks, encouragements and gentle teasing,
which is the salt of friendship!
In the Gospel, the Kingdom of Heaven is
compared to a banquet. May our humble meals
on earth be not too pale of a reflection!

59

Christians, to the Paschal Victim
Offer sacrifice and praise.
The sheep are ransomed by the Lamb;
And Christ, the undefiled,
Hath sinners to his Father reconciled.
Death with Life contended:
Combat strangely ended!
Life’s own Champion, slain,
Yet lives to reign.
Tell us, Mary: say
What thou didst see upon the way.
The tomb the Living did enclose;
I saw Christ’s glory as He rose!
The angels there attesting;
Shroud with grave-clothes resting.
Christ, my hope, has risen:
He goes before you into Galilee.
That Christ is truly risen
From the dead we know.
Victorious King, Thy mercy show!
Amen. Alleluia.

Christian Culture

Notre-Dame
de la Garde
by Dr. Marie-France Hilgar

Neither apparition nor miracle explain the
building. Just someone who in 1214 felt inspired
to erect a small chapel to honor the Virgin Mary
on top of a hill facing the city of Marseille. This
hill was called La Garde, hence the denomination
of Notre-Dame de la Garde. After 1524, this
chapel was enclosed in the fortress built by
King Francis I. It should have been closed to
the public, being a military place, but the king
decided that in peace time the faithful could have
access to the chapel by crossing a drawbridge,
which the soldiers left lowered in the daytime.
There is no other known example of a sanctuary
made inside an active fortress being left open to
the public for such a long time: 1525-1941. NotreDame de la Garde holds a very important place
in the Marseille inhabitants’ hearts. The basilica,
with its bell tower, belfry and statue is also a
62

The Angelus

March - April 2019

major local landmark. One can find it on most
posters for all kinds of events taking place in
Marseille.

The Bell Tower
The square bell tower houses a huge bell,
8,234 kilograms, erected in 1845. The bell tower
is surmounted by a belfry of 12.5 meters, which
itself supports a monumental statue of the Virgin,
9,796 kilograms, that dominates the shrine and
the city. It is made of copper, gilded with gold
leaf. The statue is re-gilded every 25 years.
By day, it reflects the beautiful Provence light
and by night it is lit up by powerful floodlights.
On the esplanade, one admires the statue
representing St. Veronica wiping Christ’s face.

A slab on its pedestal recalls the thousands of
missionaries who, in the past centuries, left for
distant countries in Asia or Africa to spread the
Good News, after having implored Our Lady’s
assistance from this height. On a side wall in
the entrance hall built in 1950 above a huge door
one can see the escutcheon of King Francis I
and in a circle towards the right, the arms of
France with a salamander below, which has
been damaged by erosion. This wall’s building
enclosed stones taken from the 16th-century
fortification, especially those surrounding the
door. The drawbridge is visible from there on
the right. The modern lobby was built in 1950
and recently totally renovated and replaced with
a monumental door surmounted by a mosaic.
This building houses, on the ground floor, a huge
hall and another room for children’s groups. On

the second level, there is the museum of NotreDame de la Garde, opened since 2013, and on the
next level, the restaurant kept by the Missionary
Workers of the “Living Water.” The restaurant
is closed on Mondays. On the fourth level, not
far away from the upper basilica, is a religious
souvenir shop. The elevator A is reserved for the
basilica and the shop. The elevator B goes to the
museum, the restaurant, the crypt and the exvoto area.
In front of the basilica’s monumental doors
one can admire the statue representing the
prophet Isaiah, who predicted the Virgin Mary
and the statue of St. John the Apostle to whom
the crucified Jesus entrusted Mary as his mother
on Good Friday. The tympanum above the main
entrance is decorated with a mosaic showing
the Virgin Mary’s Assumption. One enters
63

Christian Culture
through heavy bronze doors. Designed between
1853 and 1870, the actual sanctuary replaces
the original chapel built in 1214. It is built in the
Romanesque-Byzantine style. The arcades are
Romanesque. The Byzantine influence is visible
in the use of a variety of colored marbles (in the
interior walls, the white limestone alternates with
layers of green), as well in the four domes and the
polychrome pictorial mosaics inspired by very
beautiful mosaics from the 5th and 6th centuries
found in Rome and Ravenna. These mosaics laid
between 1886 and 1892 were restored in 20062008. Numerous ex-voto meet the visitor’s eyes.
They are sailors’ votive offerings, such as model
ships hung by ropes in sign of thanksgiving,
paintings and marble slabs covering the side
walls of the basilica. In the first side vault at the
right, dedicated to St. Roch, one can find several
military ex-voto. In several side vaults there
are shrines with saints’ relics. One side vault is
dedicated to St. Mary Magdalen, object of notable
devotion in Provence. This chapel is decorated
with votive offerings by sailors saved from a great
storm. On a marble slab are engraved the names
of the 42 cardinals, archbishops and bishops who
assisted at the consecration of the sanctuary on
June 4, 1864. The next chapel dedicated to St.
Peter also houses sailors’ offerings. The altartable, consecrated in 1986, encloses the relics of
several young Africans from Uganda, martyred
in 1886. Poignantly, they were baptized by a
missionary priest who, before embarking for
Africa, had visited Notre-Dame de la Garde on
Easter Sunday 1878.

The High Altar and the
Blessed Virgin Mary
The high altar in the back of the choir was
consecrated in April 1886 by the Cardinal of
Algiers. The silver statue of the Virgin Mary
commissioned in 1837 was solemnly crowned
in June 1931 at a great festival in Marseille that
attracted several hundreds of thousands of
people. A magnificent mosaic dominates the
high altar in the apse. In the central medallion, a
ship navigates on a stormy sea: it is the symbol
of the Church which also navigates amidst the
64

The Angelus

March - April 2019

world’s difficulties. On the sail, one can see the
Virgin Mary’s monogram and, in the sky above,
at the left, an M surrounded by rays, since the
Virgin is also called the “Star of the Sea.” This
reminds us that the Virgin Mary helps the Church
in its journey towards Christ, whose presence is
symbolized by a Cross above the lighthouse. The
mosaic that adorns the medallion, representing
foliage and birds, is one of the most beautiful
created in 19th-century France. Under this
mosaic, nine medallions illustrate as many
invocations from the Loreto litany to the Blessed
Virgin Mary. From left to right: Ark of the
Covenant, Mirror of Justice, Seat of Wisdom,
Tower of David, Mystical Rose, Tower of Ivory,
House of Gold, Spiritual Vessel, Gate of Heaven.
Above the apse vault, a mosaic represents the
Annunciation. Inside the great cupola, at the
angles, the four evangelists are featured with
their symbols, namely Matthew (a man), Mark (a
lion), Luke (a bull), and John (an eagle).
Entirely gilded, the three cupolas in the nave
vault magnificently reflect the light. In Latin or
Greek, engraved on white bandeaux, twelve
texts by Christian authors present Old Testament
prophecies concerning the Virgin Mary. In
the cupola by the choir, the medallions show
Noah’s Ark opening at the end of the flood with
the rainbow, Jacob’s Ladder and the Burning
Bush. The central medallions represent Aaron’s
flowered rod, the Menorah and the Incensory in
the Jerusalem Temple. Next to the entrance, the
medallions show the vine, the lilies surrounded
by thorns, the olive tree and the palm. Each
medallion illustrates a text, the whole vault being
a short summary of the Old Testament. Situated
in front of the Annunciation medallion which
is the first episode, this ceiling recalls how the
Old Testament leads to the New One. In the left
chapel next to the choir, dedicated to St. Joseph,
several slabs recall the visits of some saints, such
as Thérèse de Lisieux who visited the basilica
on November 29, 1887. In St. Lazarus’ vault, the
man Jesus raised from the dead, to whom much
devotion is shown in Provence, the first bishop of
Marseille, several ex-voto depict people on their
sick-beds. The small statue of the Virgin Mary
in St. Charles’ vault is an alabaster copy of the
wooden statue that was there in the 13th century,

destroyed in the time of the French Revolution.

Inside the Crypt
Entering the crypt, the visitor is met by two
huge monuments: at the right, the statue of Pope
Pius IX, at the left, the statue of the Bishop of
Marseille who laid the basilica’s first stone. He
founded the Oblates of St. Mary the Immaculate,
who served the sanctuary between 1831 and 1903.
He was proclaimed a saint in 1995. The crypt
entirely dug out of the rock is soberly decorated.
At the entrance one sees on the right a large
16th-century crucifix. One side vault is dedicated
to St. Thérèse of Lisieux, another to the Holy
Family represented in a ceramic work. Behind
the altar, a beautiful statue called the “Virgin
with the Bouquet” was presented in 1807 by a
former sailor. The beautiful folds of Mary’s cloak
are to be admired. Another side vault contains
the tabernacle containing the Blessed Sacrament,
which means, we are to guess, it is not in the
church itself. In the next side vault, a priest is
ready to assist the pilgrims. One can also admire
a beautiful “Deposition from the Cross” and a
statue of St. Anthony of Padua. Prayer intentions
can be placed in a trunk: they will be given to the
Virgin Mary after the Sunday Mass.
Leaving the crypt, after several steps, one
can reach the drawbridge. It is still in use and
raised every night and lowered every morning.
Descending the esplanade by the staircase at
his left, the visitor reaches the main bastion
belonging to the fort built by King Francis I
in the 16th century. From the angles, one can
admire the pink stones from a nearby quarry.
We must not forget that the sanctuary was built
inside a fortification that was then in use. In
1886, a garrison consisting of three barracks
was still there. Since 1934, the fortress has no
longer been in use. Since 1941, it has belonged
to the archdiocese, having been donated by the
French State, together with various buildings and
the land on the top of the hill. Another building
was erected then in order to house the Catholic
Sisters who worked for the shrine.
Of course, visitors will not leave the hill
without taking a tour of the terraces surrounding

the basilica. They will discover from there the
most beautiful urban panorama in France:
the whole of the city of Marseille, surrounded
by mountains, the Ancient Harbor, the
Mediterranean, the islands (in the island of “If”
which supposedly jailed the Count of MonteCristo), and surrounding the city, miles and miles
of beautiful beaches. The city is now guarded
by the Blessed Virgin Mary. From the top of the
hill, “la Bonne Mère,” the Good Mother, watches
faithfully over the city and farther away, toward
the sea…

65

Notre-Dame de la Garde (literally: Our Lady of the Guard) is a
basilica in Marseille, France, and the city’s best-known symbol.
It was built on the foundations of an ancient military fort at
the highest natural point in Marseille, a 489-foot limestone
outcropping on the south side of the Old Port of Marseille.
Construction of the basilica began in 1852 and lasted for 21
years. It was originally an enlargement of a medieval chapel,
but was transformed into a new structure at the request of Fr.
Bernard, the chaplain. The plans were made and developed by the
architect Henri-Jacques Espérandieu. It was consecrated while
still unfinished on June 5, 1864.

Christian Culture

by Fr. Juan-Carlos Iscara, SSPX

Is it a mortal sin, a blasphemy,
to say “Oh, my God!”?
The second Commandment prescribes that we
must not take the name of the Lord “in vain”—
that is, that we must not use His name in an
empty, worthless way, for no good purpose. The
precept demands respect for the Lord’s name
and forbids every improper use of it. In practice,
this means that we must not introduce the divine
Name into our own speech except to bless, praise
and glorify it. We should abstain from blasphemy,
that is, from any words or expressions that imply
68

The Angelus

March - April 2019

contempt or hatred, reproach or defiance of God.
Moreover, we should not make promises casually
invoking God’s name, and neither should we take
oaths that misuse His name.
Unfortunately, in our daily speech, the name
of God is frequently used for the most trivial
matters, either as a spontaneous exclamation
when we are surprised, or casually invoked
in proof of almost everything. The habitual,
unthinking and careless use of God’s name is
certainly a lack of respect towards Him and, as
such, a venial sin, but it is not a blasphemy, even

when it is used to express negative feelings,
as long as it is without hostility towards God,
without any thought of dishonor to God or any
intent to detract from His goodness.
However, in some circumstances, when we are
startled or shocked by some unexpected event,
for example, if we happen to witness a terrible
accident or when we receive unexpected joyful
news, the use of this expression could be an act
of religion—in the examples mentioned, it could
become a prayer calling upon God’s help in the
midst of a tragedy, or a prayer of thanksgiving
for those welcome news. In consequence, the
sinfulness or not of this expression will depend
on the circumstances and the intention of the
person.
Even if most people use this expression
spontaneously, without any thought of disrespect
towards God, it is still an unnecessary, irreverent
use of His name. If we have acquired this habit,
we must strive to overcome it.

Many spiritual authors
recommend the “practice
of the presence of God.”
What is it? How is it done?
From our Catechism, we have learned that
God is everywhere, that He is truly and intimately
present to all things. He gives life and preserves
all things in existence—nothing could exist
or continue to exist without God’s presence.
Absolutely nothing escapes His gaze, but all
things are open to His eyes. He keeps all things
subject to His power: with one word He creates,
and with one word He could annihilate what He
has created. In this manner, God is present to the

soul at all times, in all conditions—even to the
soul in the state of mortal sin.
There is also a special type of presence,
effected through grace and the operations that
flow from grace. God dwells in the soul as a
friend, enabling the soul to share in His own
divine life. This kind of presence exists only in
the souls in the state of grace.
The practice of the presence of God consists
in recalling as frequently as possible that
God is present in all places, at all times, and
consequently doing all things in the sight of God.
If a person is convinced that God sees him, he
will strive to avoid any sin or imperfection and to
be as recollected as possible in God’s presence.
Thus, this practice will urge us to avoid even the
slightest deliberate fault; it will impel us to do
all things with the greatest possible perfection;
it will enable us to be modest in our behavior
at all times; it will increase our fortitude in the
struggles we must face in our Christian life. This
practice will keep our souls in a spirit of prayer
and lead us to a greater, more intimate union
with God.
There are different methods of practicing the
presence of God.
One consists in visualizing God as ever
watching us from above. We do not see Him, but
He is really there and we cannot do anything that
escapes His divine gaze. For this, we are aided by
the use of crucifixes and religious images placed
prominently around us.
Another method is that of interior
recollection—that is, to live in an ever-increasing
awareness of God’s presence in the soul. It should
not be confused with an egoistic introspection,
or a mechanical observance of rules of external
behavior. Interior recollection is turning our
thoughts inward, not to seek ourselves, but to
seek God who is present in our souls. It is one of
the necessary conditions to develop a spirit of
prayer.
Various spiritual authors have proposed other
methods, which may be helpful to some people—
for example, to see the hand of God in all the
events of our lives, either adverse or prosperous;
to see God in all the natural wonders that
surround us; to see God in our superiors or in our
neighbors; etc.
69

Christian Culture
Which are the most
ancient extant objects
that make reference to the
devotion to Our Lady?
By the mid-2nd century, a pilgrim came to
Rome, Abercius, bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia
Salutaris (a big name for a very small town in what
is now Turkey). Being an old man, on returning
from his long journey he prepared his tomb, with
an inscription that is now in the Lateran Museum.
This inscription gives testimony, mostly in
veiled terms, not only to the spread of Christianity,
to the preeminence of the Roman See, to
Baptism and the Eucharist, but it also mentions
Our Lady: “Faith everywhere led me forward,
and everywhere provided as my food a Fish of
exceeding great size, and perfect, which a holy
Virgin drew with her hands from a fountain and
this faith ever gives to its friends to eat, it having
wine of great virtue, and giving it mingled with
bread.” The mention of the “Fish” is an acronym
for Iesous Christos, Theou Yios, Soter, “Jesus
Christ, Son of God, Savior,” as St. Augustine
explains (De Civ. Dei, XVIII: 23), and the Virgin is
the one who has brought Christ to us.
From almost a century later, we have a
fragment of Egyptian papyrus, in Greek, now in

John Rylands Library, Manchester, UK. It is dated
from c. 250-280, a period of increasingly violent
and methodical persecutions (Valerian, Decius,
building up to Diocletian). It contains a version of
a prayer we still use, the Sub tuum praesidium:
“Under your mercy we take refuge, O Mother of
God! Our prayers do not despise in our necessities,
but from the danger deliver us, only pure, only
blessed.”
Some scholars of a Modernistic or rationalistic
leaning, simply because the prayer uses the
expression “Mother of God,” have asserted that
it could have been written only after the council
of Ephesus, in the first half of the 5th century.
But paleographic analysis firmly places it in the
second half of the 3rd century—that is, almost
200 years before Ephesus and in the same period
in which the images of Our Lady were being
painted in the Roman catacombs. It expresses
the faith of the Church regarding Our Lady, in a
simple, succinct way. She is the Mother of God, the
Theotokos, “God-bearer,” Deipara, Dei Genetrix,
“birth-giver of God.” She has an unheard-of power
of intercession—without giving Her yet the title,
She is acknowledged as the Mediatrix of all
graces. Finally, she is the “only blessed,” especially
chosen by God, and She is the “only pure,”
perpetually Virgin.

344 pp.–Hardcover–STK# 8343✱–$25.55

The Best of Questions
and Answers
The best questions and the best answers of 40 years of The Angelus. This will be a family’s
heirloom reference book for everyday Catholic living to match the Catholic Faith we believe
and the Latin Mass we attend. Over 300 answers classified under 30 subtitles.
–– Marriage, Parenting, Family Life
and Child Rearing
–– Science and Medical Matters
–– Life After Death
–– Church Practices and Customs

–– The Papacy and Church Teachings
–– The Bible and Biblical Matters
–– The Trinity, Jesus Christ, The Virgin
Mary, Angels, and Saints
–– The Mass and the Liturgy

814 pp.–Hardcover–STK# 6720–$39.95

The Church's Year
The perfect book for family reading. Part I includes texts and commentaries on the
Epistles, Gospels, and most other prayers from the Mass for every Sunday and Holy
Day of the liturgical year. Part II focuses on teaching doctrine and morals through the
liturgy in Question & Answer format.

This book is a MUST for growing
the Faith of your family in 2019.

News from Tradition
Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman
At a time in the Church’s history when any good
news is hard to find, there came the announcement
that a miracle had been attributed to the
intercession of Bl. John Henry Newman, paving
the way for his canonization. The miracle was
the inexplicable healing of an expectant mother
from life-threatening complications from her
pregnancy after praying for Newman’s intercession.
Her doctors testified that they had no medical
explanation for her sudden and complete recovery.
Sadly, and unfairly, Cardinal Newman has
been seen by some in traditional Catholic circles
as being the forerunner of many of the damaging
ideas coming out of Vatican II. This is so because
the modernist innovators, in an attempt to validate
their ideas, began to spread the thinking that
Vatican II was “Newman’s Council.” Needless to
say, this is demonstrably untrue. Even from before
his conversion to the Faith, Newman was writing
against the “liberals” in the Church of England who
held the same ideas as those whom Pope St. Pius X
would call Modernists some 40 years later.
Interestingly, it was Newman’s historical
research into the Arian crisis and St. Athanasius
that started him on the path to the Church from
Anglicanism. Through this research, he came to see
that the Protestant Revolution was an abandonment
of what the Church in the first centuries believed.
He also came to see, contrary to what he originally
hoped to prove, that Anglicanism was not the via
media (middle road) between Protestantism and
Catholicism, but rather just another Protestant sect
which kept a liturgical character about it.
After his conversion from Anglicanism, Newman
faced many hardships. He was abandoned by much
of his family and many former friends. Colleagues
wanted nothing to do with him for becoming a
papist. They even went so far as to say that he was
always a “crypto-Catholic” who passed himself off
as an Anglican. Sadly, some Catholics in England
would not accept him as a “real” Catholic and saw
him as a “plant” by the Anglicans seeking to destroy
the Church.
In 1879, Pope Leo XIII raised Newman to the
College of Cardinals (which Newman saw as his
vindication from the accusation that he was not
a “real” Catholic). In his short speech given after
72

The Angelus

March - April 2019

he was presented with the document naming
him a Cardinal, Newman stated: “For 30, 40, 50
years I have resisted to the best of my powers
the spirit of liberalism in religion… Liberalism in
religion is the doctrine that there is no positive
truth in religion, but that one creed is as good as
another, and this is the teaching which is gaining
substance and force daily. It is inconsistent with
any recognition of any religion as true. It teaches
that all are to be tolerated, for all are matters of
opinion. Revealed religion is not a truth, but a
sentiment and a taste, not an objective fact, not
miraculous; and it is the right of each individual to
make it say just what strikes his fancy. Devotion
is not necessarily founded on faith. Men who go
to Protestant churches and to Catholic, may get
good things from both and belong to neither. They
may fraternize together in spiritual thoughts and
feelings, without having any views at all of doctrine
in common, or seeing the need of them. Since, then,
religion is so personal a peculiarity and so private
a possession, we must of necessity ignore it in the
intercourse of man with man. If a man puts on a

new religion every morning, what is that to you?
It is as impertinent to think about a man’s religion
as about his sources of income or the management
of his family. Religion is in no sense the bond of
society…
The general character of this great apostasia is
one and the same everywhere…I lament it deeply,
because I foresee that it may be the ruin of many
souls; but I have no fear at all that it really can do
aught of serious harm to the Word of God, to Holy
Church, to our Almighty King, the Lion of the tribe
of Judah, faithful and true, or to His Vicar on earth.
Christianity has been too often in what seemed
deadly peril, that we should fear any new trial for
it now. So far is certain; on the other hand, what is
uncertain, and in these great contests commonly is
uncertain, and what is commonly a great surprise,
when it is witnessed, is the particular mode by
which, in the event, Providence rescues and saves
His elect inheritance. Sometimes our enemy is
turned into a friend; sometimes he is despoiled

of that special virulence of evil which was so
threatening; sometimes he falls to pieces of himself;
sometimes he does just so much as is beneficial,
and then is removed. Commonly, the Church has
nothing more to do than to go on in her own proper
duties, in confidence and peace, to stand still and to
see the salvation of God.”
In reading these words from Newman, it
becomes obvious that he in no way ever espoused
those ideas which would come to infect the Church
at Vatican II, and would certainly have been a clear
voice condemning the errors of Vatican II were he
alive today.
Cardinal Newman died in 1889 and was beatified
by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010. Blessed John Henry
Newman, pray for us!
All of Newman’s writings may be found online
here: www.newmanreader.org

Cambodia Commemorates the Fall of Communism
January 7, 2019 was the 40th anniversary
of the fall of the Khmer Rouge reign of terror;
over 60,000 Cambodians commemorated this
fortunate event in the presence of their Prime
Minister Hun Sen.
In the packed Olympic stadium, the head of
the Cambodian government called the fall of
the communist regime a “second birth” for his
country.
Between 1975 and 1979, the Khmer Rouge
party imposed a reign of terror based on
a faithful application of the principles of
Communism. Over 2 million Cambodians, nearly
a quarter of the entire population at the time,
perished, most of them in atrocious conditions.
The Catholic Church in Cambodia suffered
greatly from the persecution organized by
the Khmer Rouge; we must not forget that
Christianity has never been more than tolerated
on this Khmer land where Buddhism is the
official religion.
In the 18th century, many Catholics

persecuted in Vietnam emigrated to Cambodia;
thus, in 1970, the Church had 65,000 faithful, 90%
of whom were Vietnamese.
But when General Lon Nol came into power
that same year, he stirred up ethnic enmities
and organized pogroms against the Vietnamese:
40,000 of them returned to their native land.
Of the Catholics who were still there when
the communists arrived in 1975, 48.6% fell
victim to the Pol Pot regime, advances Marek
Sliwinski’s report published in 1995, Le genocide
khmer rouge : une analyse démographique
(The Khmer Rouge Genocide – A Demographic
Analysis). This made Catholics the religious
community most affected by the communist
regime, proportionately speaking.
The blood of the martyrs is the seed of
Christianity. In 2006, the Church consisted
of 22,000 Catholics—7,000 Cambodian, and
the rest Vietnamese—with an average of 200
catechumens requesting baptism every year.

73

News from Tradition
Archbishop Viganò Vindicated

74

The name of Archbishop Carlo Viganò has
become, for most Catholics, very well known over
the past six months—certainly more well known
than when he was Papal Nuncio to the United
States from 2011 until 2016—due to the three
letters of testimony he has written concerning
the continuing coverup of the malicious deeds
of Archbishop Theodore McCarrick. Although
there have been numerous attempts to discredit
the archbishop, none of these attempts have been
characterized by a refutation of the charges he
made, but rather they were simply ad hominem
attacks on the Archbishop’s character.
One part of Archbishop Viganò’s testimony had
to do with Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington,

In early January 2019, the Catholic News Agency
(CNA) reported that Wuerl, while Bishop of
Pittsburgh, reported to them that McCarrick had
committed sexual abuses in 2004 and that Wuerl
had forwarded the report to the Papal Nuncio in
Washington, D.C. The Diocese of Pittsburgh, in a
press release, confirms the veracity of the CNA
report.
Sadly, but typically, Wuerl tried to claim
that what he meant when he said he had “no
knowledge” of McCarrick’s deeds was that he had
no knowledge of his abuse of minors (the 2004
report dealt only with the abuse of an adult male).
Within a day of this monstrous prevarication,
a tape of a CBS “This Morning” interview with

D.C. (now retired, but appointed by Pope Francis
as apostolic administrator until the naming of
the new archbishop). Viganò stated very clearly
in his letters that Wuerl was well aware of the
sexual abuse of seminarians and young priests
by McCarrick. Following the publication of
Archbishop Viganò’s testimony, Wuerl made the
rounds of various media outlets denying any
knowledge of McCarrick’s sinful and scandalous
behavior. In a subsequent letter Archbishop Viganò
stated that Wuerl was lying when he made the
claim of not having any knowledge.

Wuerl shows him being asked specifically
“Were you aware of the rumors McCarrick was
having relations with other priests?” to which he
responded “No, no.”
The evidence is in and it is clear that
Archbishop Viganò’s accusations regarding Wuerl
were completely accurate—Wuerl did indeed
know about McCarrick’s actions and that he is
a first class liar. With this revelation, it is now
almost impossible to paint Archbishop Viganò as a
discontented crank who is merely trying to make
Pope Francis look bad, as many have tried to do.

The Angelus

March - April 2019

Faithful Chinese Catholics Abandoned by Pope Francis
As had been rumored for months, the Vatican
and the Communist Chinese Government have
signed an accord wherein the communists
will be able to nominate the bishops of the
Church in China in exchange for the pope
being recognized as the head of the Church.
The pope will, at least on paper, have the
right to veto any particular nominee, though
this is seen as a placation of the Underground
Catholic Church (i.e., those bishops, priests and
faithful who have refused to join the Catholic
Patriotic Association which is the puppet of
the communist government and refused to
acknowledge papal authority).

bishops have been persecuted by the government
and even spent time in prison for their faithfulness
to the true Faith.
Cardinal Joseph Zen, the emeritus Archbishop
of Hong Kong, who has been very vocal in warning
against this precise type of sell out of faithful
Chinese Catholics (he once said: the Vatican
is helping the government to annihilate the
underground Church that Beijing was not able
to crush.) seems himself to have caved to the
prevailing attitude in the post-conciliar Church
that the pope must always be obeyed even if he
commands something evil. Cardinal Zen stated:
“I have told these two bishops that they should
not resign voluntarily so as not to cooperate with
evil. But I have also advised them to obey if the
pope orders it, because a pope’s command must
always be obeyed… There is the problem of the
seven bishops excommunicated and pardoned
by Francis. So far none of them have been
placed at the head of a diocese. If this happens,
I will be silent for ever, because that would be
unacceptable and would force me to decide
to rebel against the pope or to remain silent. I
will be silent.” It is indeed a sad state of affairs
when the seeming champion of the Underground
Catholic Church in China falls under the sway of
“papolatry.”

Official Portrait of a Catholic Patriotic Association Bishop
The Future of the Church in China?

Under the agreement, the Underground
Church will be subsumed into the Patriotic
Association. It has been well circulated that
Pope Francis himself was anxious to have the
agreement signed.
To make matters even worse, the Vatican
representative, Archbishop Claudio Celli,
handed several underground Catholic bishops
letters signed by Cardinals Parolin and Filoni
asking them to resign their dioceses in order
to make way for new bishops chosen by the
Chinese government. It was implied that Pope
Francis expected them to do so as a “gesture
of obedience.” It should be noted that these

Joseph Cardinal Zen
Archbishop Emeritus of Hong Kong

75

If one does away with the fact of the
Resurrection, one also does away
with the Cross, for both stand and
fall together, and one would then
have to find a new center for the
whole message of the Gospel.

Theological Studies

The 20th Century Herald

Jacques
Maritain
by Prof. Luis Roldán. Translation by Inés de Erausquin

Part II of a Conference on Catholic Liberalism
given by Prof. Luis Roldán, at La Reja Seminary
(2012)
Maritain is a curious fellow; a man who came from
a Protestant family, converted to Catholicism and,
through the first part of the 20th century, especially the 1920s, became renowned as the principal
expert on Thomism. Thanks to the publication of
some of his works—the Introduction to Philosophy,
The Degrees of Knowledge, Three Reformers, and
two books which he later did not want to publish,
Théonas and Antimoderne—he grew famous as a
Catholic intellectual, absolutely faithful to Catholic
doctrine, and promoter of St. Thomas; but the
condemnation of Action Française, to which he belonged or at least was very close to it, drove him to
change direction. In the 1920s, he began to publish

78

The Angelus

March - April 2019

other books; especially in the first, Religion and
Culture, he tried to revise the condemnation of the
modern world and Liberalism that the Magisterium
maintained.
The Spanish Civil War
One of the first public acts in which Maritain
showed his thread-bareness, as it were, happened
during the Spanish War. In 1936, the Spanish War
broke out; and for most Spanish Catholics, it was
very clear that the fundamental motive was the
defense of the Faith, which was under attack by
atheistic Communism, Freemasonry etcetera. In
1937, Maritain published an article in the newspaper
La Croix, the official newspaper of France, in which
he said that “In Spain, really, everyone is mistaken.”
He went on to say, more or less, “In Spain, there is
one group that believes it defends religion, but re-

Theological Studies
ally they are defending a sociopolitical system that
oppresses the working classes, defending injustice;
and there is another group that believes it is attacking the Church, but in reality they are defending
the rights of man, the dignity of the workers and
so forth.” He concretely denies the right to rise up;
because, he says, the Catholics—as Spain is a democratic republic—could and should fight against antiChristian legislature, but only through legal means.
This was the first time that Maritain showed his true
colors. Fortunately, in the Spain of that time, his doctrine was not very established; but nonetheless, it
did continue to spread, as a few years later came the
Second World War and Maritain, who was married
to a Jew—Raïssa—exiled himself to North America.
There he was transformed into a new expert on
Catholic doctrine. He would go about to all the universities, and in the 1940s, he published one of his
most influential works: Integral Humanism. Another
book came later—Human Rights and Natural Law. In
these he finished formulating his new political doctrine; and he also had to re-formulate his approach
to history on a more systematic level. He bases his
teaching primarily on the distinction between the
individual and the person. The “individual” is considered as the purely material aspect of man, who
is thus reduced to a total dependence on the state.
Here, he leaves behind all the theories of St. Thomas
Aquinas, which he does not apply, turning instead to
the primacy of the “greater good.” The “person,” on
the other hand, is oriented solely to God, and is not
subordinate to the state, nor is he subordinate to the
greater good.
We cannot discuss all the errors of Maritain, but
basically, the fundamental problem he has is that the
distinction of the person and the individual is unsustainable. Every human person is a human individual,
and every individual human is a human person! But
the fundamental error consists in his confusing what
we might call the ontological dignity of man, with his
practical or moral dignity. When I assess the ontological dignity of something—that is, the dignity or
worth that it has in being what it is—I am not thinking
of a practical object. Let us say, for example, that a
mouse, from an ontological point of view, has more
worth than a nugget of gold; because the nugget
of gold is an inanimate object, while the mouse is
a living being. Now no one, in the normal course of
things, would consider trading a mouse for a nug-

get of gold. I think of something that Fr. Calderón’s
father says that has always delighted me about the
relationship between intelligence and thought. “A
thought is something accidental, fleeting. From the
ontological point of view, intelligence is much more
worthy of esteem; it’s the superior faculty of man.
But considering from a practical point of view, intelligence is a potential thing; thought is the action.
Intelligence drives you to think.”
From this point, Maritain went on to systematize
his political doctrine by saying that fundamentally,
these rights of man, which were the “rights” of the
French Revolution, are actually Catholic truths. To
understand this better, we would have to look at history, which Maritain does do. One of the first major
difficulties for liberal Catholics is that the Church
is a few centuries old, so one has to consider all its
history. Thus, Maritain had to reinterpret history;
he said that there were different epochs of history
from the viewpoint of the relationship of Church and
State. The first epoch, what we can call the “sacral
state,” would roughly correspond to the Middle
Ages. At this stage the power of the Catholic Church
nearly blotted out human nature, which gave way to
a sort of supernaturalism. Since this went against
the order of things that God wants, says Maritain,
a reaction had to occur. This reaction was the “lay
State”—the French Revolution—which sought to
eliminate religion everywhere. And, he adds, this is
obviously bad, but understandable; there was too
much of the Church! But now, after all the drama of
the World Wars, perhaps man can come to an accord and establish a third epoch—by way of thesis,
antithesis, and synthesis—which is the secular state.
A secular State is basically the ideal of Lammenais,
a free Church in a free State: a state organized in a
democratic manner, which is the only way that conforms to our natural rights, because it is the only one
that respects the dignity of the human person; in
which the Church has freedom to preach, but cannot
demand any privileged situation, nor of special union
with the State; much less, of course, may it use civil
law or policy to impede the manifestation of any
other cult that is not Catholic.
Historical Inaccuracies
This is the scheme of Maritain. To begin with, this
is just wrong historically! To anyone who studies medieval history, the first thing that calls our atten-

79

Theological Studies
tion is the number of conflicts there were between
the papacy and the Empire! The medieval Kings
were anything but a bunch of servile little altar boys
enslaved to clerical power! On the contrary, to find
such a lay model we have to look at the post-Conciliar laity, the lay-adult followers of the Council! This
scheme of Maritain’s has no foundation in reality;
it cannot be verified by history; it is incorrect. The
other element he brings up is that this “sacral state”
of his is a violation of human dignity; and where do
we find such a violation? In that, fundamentally,
there is no respect for the right to religious liberty.
And here Maritain had his moment of triumph at
the Second Vatican Council, especially in certain
paragraphs of Gaudium et Spes, and especially in
the document Dignitatis Humanæ. It is impossible
to understand this document without having read
the work of Maritain. Here, then, is the nucleus of
Maritain’s error, which consists of this confusion regarding human dignity. Be it noted that this concept
of human rights is a theme that swirls through the
whole Second Vatican Council and post-Conciliar
magisterium; it has become the new topic of debate
for contemporary modernists.
It would be worth it to add a little paragraph
about this topic. What is dignity, or worthiness?
We could say that it is what is deserved, merited; a
criminal condemned to death for a terrible crime has
received a worthy punishment; a deserved punishment. A hero of his country who has conducted himself brilliantly in war and has a fine monument built
to him, we may say, has received a worthy prize.
Worth or dignity is what man merits. So the fundamental question that we must ask ourselves about
human rights, is asking why a man deserves something. A teacher of mine once said to me, “Today,
I was talking to my son about the titles of human
dignity. A title is a condition or quality of an individual which places him in a determined position,
to make him obliged to do something, or deserving
to receive something.” It is very clear that in a man,
when considering his human dignity, there are different aspects we can consider. Firstly, we can make
an analysis of human dignity in the light of reason;
and indeed, we can say that there is a natural dignity
to man. Indeed, man, by the simple fact of being
human, of being a human person, of being a rational
animal, deserves to be treated as such. For example,
though a person should commit the worst of crimes,

80

The Angelus

March - April 2019

no punishment that should corrupt him morally may
be applied to him. And certainly, by virtue of this
ontological or natural dignity of man, we could conclude that man has certain (very imprecise) rights;
for example, this right not to be corrupted. This
dignity, because it is essential, is the same in both
the worst of criminals and the greatest of men.
But the right that is most important, both in light
of ethics and of politics, is not this last; it is practical dignity, moral dignity. Pope Leo XIII mentions
this in the beginning of his encyclical Libertas, which
is the greatest document of the Church against
Liberalism. Those of you who haven’t read it—I recommend that you do; or better, that you study it! Leo
XIII, in this document, says very clearly that the dignity of man does consist of being a rational animal;
but fundamentally, it consists of what man does. If I
progress in virtue through using my freedom of action to follow God’s law, the moral law, I augment my
moral dignity. And this moral dignity is not the same
in the worst of delinquents and the greatest of the
saints; this is what makes us build a monument to
the one, and condemn the other to death. Our ontological dignity is the same; our moral dignity is not.
And in the juridical and political scheme of things,
the most relevant thing is this practical dignity. We
can also take into consideration the idea of supernatural dignity. This idea of dignity appears in the
sermons of St. Leo: “Christian, acknowledge your
dignity;” and what is that dignity? That we are called
to eternal life, the life of grace obtained by baptism.
A Failure to Make Distinctions
In Maritain, all these aspects are confused.
Basically, he does not want to distinguish between
ontological and practical dignity. We may note that
Dignitatis Humanæ, when it touches on the right
to religious liberty, it is mentioned as an objective
right, founded on the dignity of the human person; a
right that is held just as much by the one who seeks
truth as the one who refuses it—he who desires
good is the same as he who desires evil. From this
basis springs the ideal of egalitarian democracy:
as we are all equal in ontological dignity, we should
all have the same right to participate in politics.
Therefore, democracy is the only form of government that corresponds with our natural rights. Any
form of government that establishes distinction, be
it of class or of function, violates human rights.

Theological Studies
The second element visible in Maritain through
this fundamental Liberalism is something we have
mentioned in previous lectures: namely, nominalism—disdain for social conditions. In Dignitatis
Humanæ this is very plain to see—the idea that the
only thing the Church needs is freedom. Here, at its
depths, there is a sort of “angelism”; the idea that
man, without exterior influences, always does good.
There a denial or forgetfulness, implicit at the very
least, of the dogma of original sin. This idea is also
seen in the work of Rousseau, and almost all the
liberals maintain some shade of it. Rousseau’s idea
is just this: that man acts badly because he is corrupted by society, but that his nature itself is good;
which is a problem, because it ends up confusing
nature with spontaneity.
We may define Rousseau’s doctrine as something like this: a Bengal tiger which is captured and
shut up in a circus, obliged to jump through fiery
hoops and do pirouettes, loses its fur and doesn’t
reproduce, is corrupted; because his nature is
violated. Man, he says, is the same; he should be
allowed to act freely and spontaneously, and he
would act well. I don’t remember who it is that tells
that when Rousseau sent in his contribution to the
Encyclopedia, Voltaire—who was a cretin, but nonetheless an intelligent fellow—reading his work, commented, “I have never seen such a strong attempt to
make us all walk on all fours.”
In these ideas is a forgetfulness that human
liberty, if man really is free, is a situational liberty; it
has conditions placed upon it by social means. And
this conditioning always exists. Life in society, for
good or ill, conditions me. The action of a normal
traditional Catholic family is not the same as that
of a broken family. It is not the same to live in an
economy that is truly oriented toward the common
good, marked by justice, as to live in an economy
that is unhinged. It is not the same to breathe in a
Catholic culture, as to breathe in a totally revolutionary one. Man’s liberty is purely situational. This is
why, in that beautiful book of Archbishop Lefebvre’s,
They Have Uncrowned Him, there is a chapter that
is called “On Good Influence.” Note that the theme
of Dignitatis Humanæ is immunity from influence.
Absolute immunity from influence is impossible. For
that we would have to live like Robinson Crusoe, on
a desert island. If I have any kind of social life, there
are some limits involved. I have a neighbor who

takes the bus with me, the one that is always playing
his radio, the one who keeps knocking on my door;
human freedom always has limits.
The Folly of “Complete Liberty”
The idea of complete liberty is impossible, utopian; and it belittles the effect of social conditions.
This is why liberals, in their analysis of politics, commit a fundamental error when they admit democracy as the only possible form of government; not
only because democracy is false, but because they
do not admit what we might call, for lack of a better
term, the formal logic of institutions: the fact that at
the moment of its organization, every institution has
an internal logic which over time imposes itself over
the will of its members. One of the greatest errors
of the liberal Catholic is to acknowledge modern
democracy, thinking that modern democracy is
neutral. No! Modern democracy has a formal logic,
and history has shown it. For this reason all the attempts of Christian democratic parties to evangelize
democracy have failed.
The strongest example is that of Italy, which
has been ruled by a hegemonic party for 50 years.
And yet, Italy has abortion; it has divorce; it has
the separation of Church and State; it has a liberal,
or Marxist economy. And all this—why? Because
they were all evil people? I don’t believe that it’s
because they were all evil people. It is because they
did not take into account that every institution has
a formal logic. This is the other fundamental error
of Liberalism, and today, we live with it. The concrete form of Liberalism that all of you will have to
face, when you go out into the world, is principally
Catholic Liberalism. In our countries—if it were
not for Catholic Liberalism—absolute, atheistic
Liberalism would be a mere intellectual curiosity,
found in small groups. Catholic Liberalism is the
Liberalism that we run into on a daily basis. And
today, the principal issue that we have to deal with
is the idea of separation of Church and State, which
liberals have tried to disguise with a new face, which
they call “healthy laicism.”
The issue to note is that, curiously, the phrase,
“a healthy and legitimate laicism” is not mentioned
by the Second Vatican Council. I have never found
it. It is mentioned in a discourse of Pius XII; but I
noticed that this discourse didn’t seem to appear
anywhere until a friend of mine, a fellow-graduate

81

Theological Studies
of the Universidad Católica Argentina, rescued the
text and published an article which scandalized the
liberals. Pius XII gave this talk to the Italian Marche;
and what he says is that this “healthy and legitimate
laicism” consists of making a distinction between
political power and ecclesiastical power—but never
in separating them! And he talked about a Catholic
Italy, about the Catholic Marche, and so on. The liberals could not stand this speech from Pius XII.
In what, then, does this “healthy and legitimate
laicism” consist? Basically, it is the scheme of
Maritain: the free Church in a free State; the idea of
a purely neutral State, which does not support the
Catholic Faith, but does not persecute it either, and
within which the Church can carry out Her apostolic
mission with freedom. This is the dominant doctrine
today; this is the line of thought of Benedict XVI. In
a book he published some years ago—I have the ’82
edition, but I think it is older—called Compendium of
Moral Theology, he plainly says that Gaudium et Spes
and Dignitatis Humanæ have acted as a true counterSyllabus. That is to say, their idea was to reconcile
the Church with the world as it was after 1789. Later
he returns to this topic, speaking of religious liberty,
and says, “This is not indifferentism.” The interpretation he gives is to say that man does not have
the right, in the moral sense, to follow any religion;
rather, he is morally obliged to follow the true religion. However, he adds, political and juridical order
cannot promote one specific religion.
The Distinction Between Ethics and Rights
His problem is the distinction between morals
and rights, or more exactly, between ethics and
rights. This can be argued on many points; but I
believe that the best way to confront this proposal of
a “healthy laicism,” or of religious liberty, is not only
to show that is a false doctrine, but rather, that it is
impossible—unverifiable in practice. It is something
that does not happen in real life; it’s like talking
about a horse with eight legs—something that does
not conform to reality. Horses have four legs! Here
and there, one might find a deformed one with three
or perhaps five legs; but none with eight!
This, then, is the great lie that is hidden in the idea
of a secular State—a purely lay State. This is impossible to find: why? Because in any societal group—
and let us look at something closer than the large
political community, which seems too large and

82

The Angelus

March - April 2019

distant—its form, that which makes it what it is, is
fundamentally an agreement of wills—be it a group
of friends that get together to play a game of ball,
or a gang of delinquents that agree to a kidnapping
for ransom. This agreement of wills, this concord,
is always dependent on a certain worldview. Let’s
take the example of our gang of kidnappers. They
have agreed to carry out a kidnapping for ransom.
Therefore, they have agreed that kidnapping for ransom is a good thing. This idea, this worldview, is—to
put a label on it—the public orthodoxy of that group.
But what happens if, amid this gang of kidnappers,
one of the kidnappers says to himself one day, “I’m
going to start speaking against kidnapping”? There
are several possible outcomes—we can think of at
least three. The first outcome is that nobody listens.
With that outcome, it’s possible that our man will
decide to leave the gang. Another possibility is that
he is successful, and manages to convince the rest
of the group that kidnapping is a bad thing. And
there goes the gang. The third possibility is that
the leader of the gang says to him, “Look, you stop
bothering us about this, or you can leave”; because,
indeed, the very existence of the group depends on
maintaining its particular public orthodoxy.
This has been verified over and over in history.
When we analyze the relationship of the Church with
the various nations, this sort of public orthodoxy
always exists. What happens is that it can always
change content, but it never disappears. It is very
interesting to see it in the way the conversion of
Rome to Christianity unfolded. Why did Rome persecute Christianity if there was almost total religious
freedom in Rome? In Rome, there was a temple to
Isis; in Athens St. Paul even ran into an altar “To the
Unknown God.” The pagan’s problem is certainly not
that he lacks gods; more likely that he has too many!
But the unity of the Roman Empire rested on a
public orthodoxy that demanded recognition of the
primacy of the Pax Romana. The idea of the Empire
was that one could worship whomever one liked;
but over and above each person’s particular belief
stood the greatness of Rome. The refusal of the
Church to admit this is what led to martyrdom and
persecution. And it is very interesting that one of the
last persecutors was Galerius, one of Diocletian’s
men, who wrote the first edict of toleration of
Christianity—predating that of Constantine—in 311
AD. He said, “Here, the Christians adore neither

their own God nor the pagan gods. So I will permit
them to adore their God, on condition that they pray
for Rome.” There was a transitional period between
311 and 385, which was when Theodosius, under
the influence of St. Ambrose, declared Catholicism
the official religion of the Roman Empire. And then,
they realized that there could not be a political order
without a public orthodoxy. Insofar as they could,
the Romans defended their pagan orthodoxy, and
when they discovered that it didn’t work, many of
those same pagans became the promulgators of a
Catholic State, because they did realize that there
could be no society without an official religion.
The same thing, in reverse, occurs in the modern
era. Today we discussed the chapter on civil religion
of the Social Contract of Rousseau. You may say
that I’m cheating a bit, because I am taking all my
examples from Europe, and Liberalism in France has
always been against the Church and what have you.
Why don’t I give the example of the United States?
Well, because all liberals follow the same example,
even in otherwise good books.
The Church and Political Power
The other day I was re-reading a book by Fr.
Hillaire, Demonstrated Religion; and in his arguments
for setting aside persecution of the Church, he sets
forth the example of the United States. He says,
“Look, here in the United States is the perfect model. The Church prospers, there’s a republic, there’s
democracy. They don’t burn churches, they don’t
kill priests or arrest them…” Maritain would also say
that the United States is the model of democracy.
Many teachers would say that the North American
system is the model of healthy and legitimate
laicism—a place where separation of Church and
State unfolds freely. This is false. The US is also a
confessional State of sorts. It has a rather confused,
but deist religion, and also submits to the Church in
daily life.
There’s a very interesting article published
not long ago by a North American professor,
Christopher Ferrara, who is the president of the
American Catholic Lawyers’ Association, in which
he analyzes the jurisprudence of the US Supreme
Court, and in particular the voting of one of the
justices, Justice Scalia, who passes for Catholic—a
man of Opus Dei. Ferrara shows that there is also

a system of public orthodoxy in the United States.
North America has a system of separation of Church
and State—of religious liberty.
But what happens when there is an action that
someone wants to carry out because of religious
commitment that clashes with a legal norm? Scalia
says that “If someone, for example, wants an abortion, in a democracy, the State should permit abortion. To say that it is against natural law is to place
oneself above the democratic state and presume
to decide, in opposition to the majority, what is
good and what is evil. I don’t believe that’s my job.”
In other words, the problem remains present—the
same problem that doctors have who refuse to perform abortions in states where abortion is legalized
by society…and we can give many more examples.
Every concrete political organization always has
a certain confessional aspect; it always has a public
orthodoxy. Because of this, the idea that the Church
can survive in a sort of limbo in which it is neither
persecuted nor united to the political power is a
utopian idea; it has never been fulfilled in history and
never will be.
The Church is either persecuted, or it informs the
political power; or else it is transitioning from one
of those states to the other. Do not accept, as a real
possibility, the true separation of the Church and the
State. The idea is always present which Father very
astutely put at the head of today’s program: Christ
always reigns. He reigns, either as He should, or because society has turned anti-Christian. The utopian
possibility of the modern Catholic liberals, the idea
of a free Church in a free State, is something that
has never occurred and will never occur in history.

83

Fun Learning

Go to angelus.online
Entertainment
for the whole
family that helps build a better
understanding of the Faith!

The Angelus is now Online!
You are now able to read The Angelus magazine anywhere at anytime! Go to: angelus.
online on your PC or mobile device and be sure to share with family and friends who
may not yet have a subscription. This apostolate can only help those that it reaches
and we need you to share it with those in need!

www.angeluspress.org — 1-800-966-7337
Please visit our website to see our entire selection of books

Donate now!
Help Spread the Truth of Tradition
Around the World...

We need your help, now more than ever!
Please go to Angeluspress.org to make a donation today!

Simply the Best Journal of
Catholic Tradition Available!
“Instaurare omnia in Christo”

For over three decades, The Angelus has stood
for Catholic truth, goodness, and beauty
against a world gone mad. Our goal has always
been the same: to show the glories of the
Catholic Faith and to bear witness to the constant teaching of the Church in the midst of
the modern crisis in which we find ourselves.
Each issue contains:
• A unique theme focusing on doctrinal
and practical issues that matter to you,
the reader
• Regular columns, from History to
Family Life, Spirituality and more
• Some of the best and brightest Catholic
thinkers and writers in the Englishspeaking world
• An intellectual formation to strengthen
your Faith in an increasingly hostile
world

Subscribe Today
Don’t let another year go by without reading
the foremost journal of Catholic Tradition.

PRINT SUBSCRIPTIONS
Name______________________________________________________________________________________________
Address____________________________________________________________________________________________
City______________________________ State______________ ZIP______________ Country______________________
 CHECK  VISA  MASTERCARD  AMEX  DISCOVER  MONEY ORDER
Card #_______________________________________________________ Exp. Date_____________________________
Phone # _____________________________________E-mail_________________________________________________
Mail to: Angelus Press, PO Box 217, St. Marys, KS 66536, USA

PLEASE CHECK ONE
United States
 1 year $45.00
 2 years $85.00
 3 years $120.00

Foreign Countries (inc. Canada & Mexico)

 1 year
 2 years
 3 years

$65.00
$125.00
$180.00

All payments must be in US funds only.

ONLINE ONLY SUBSCRIPTIONS
To subscribe visit: www.angelusonline.org.
Everyone has FREE access to every article from issues of The Angelus over two years old, and selected articles from recent issues.
All magazine subscribers have full access to the online version of the magazine (a $20 Value)!

The
Last
Word
Dear readers,
“Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought within herself what manner of
salutation this should be” (Lk. 1:29).
In this beautiful mystery of the Annunciation, remembered at every Ave Maria, we have
from Our Lady herself an important key to the question of private revelations, even for her
own apparitions. This key is the virtue of prudence, which always stands in a middle between
too much and too little in everything.
Here we see Our Lady troubled by the angelic apparition and laudatory greeting, and we
see her thinking within herself. The rest of the story shows how she then discerned that this
angel really came from God, and at the end how she consented to his heavenly request: Fiat
mihi secundum verbum tuum.
It is the Church that examines and discerns between true apparitions of Our Lady, of Our
Lord and of the Saints, and false ones. It is the Church that tells us, based on the classic rules
of discernment of spirits, such as those of St. Ignatius, if we can believe or if we must reject
a particular apparition. Faith is always given to God through the Church: “He who hears you,
hears me!”
The major problem we face today in this field is basically ignorance both of the nature of
these supernatural manifestations and of the rules of prudence. The essential principles of
discernment are contained in the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius, nn. 328-336. I highly recommend the commentary of these by Rev. Fr. L. Barrielle, SSPX, published by Angelus Press
[Rules for Discerning the Spirits]. I suggest also the Jesuit Scaramelli’s Discernment of Spirits
(available only in second hand editions, in French, Italian or Spanish…). He expounds on the
Ignatian rules and helps souls to discern, directly or indirectly, whether these supernatural
manifestations come from God or from the devil. “By their fruits you shall know them.”
Fr. Daniel Couture

The Society of Saint Pius X is an international priestly society of almost 700
priests. Its main purpose is the formation and support of priests.
The goal of the Society of Saint Pius X is to preserve the Catholic Faith in its
fullness and purity, not changing, adding to or subtracting from the truth that
the Church has always taught, and to diffuse its virtues, especially through
the Roman Catholic priesthood. Authentic spiritual life, the sacraments, and
the traditional liturgy are its primary means to foster virtue and sanctity and
to bring the divine life of grace to souls.
The Angelus, in helping the whole man, tries to be an outlet for the work of the
Society, helping them reach souls. We aspire to help deepen your spiritual life,
nourish your studies, understand the history of Christendom, and restore the
reign of Christ the King in Christian culture in every aspect.
$ 9.00
RETURN UNDELIVERABLE CANADIAN ADDRESSES TO: THE ANGELUS, 480 MCKENZIE STREET, WINNIPEG, MB, R2W 5B9