SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2021

The

“Instaurare omnia in Christo”

ngelus
T he V oice of T raditional C atholicism

Women and the Church
Dr. Amy Fahey on the Visions of St. Bridget of Sweden
Dr. Andrew Childs on Hildegard von Bingen: Féminine Mystique
Mary’s Not-So-Painless Labor: The Crucifixion as the Birth of the Church
Vatican II: Judging a Tree by Its Fruits
Archbishop Lefebvre’s Sermon to the SSPX Sisters
An Interview With Fr. Emily, Chaplain of the SSPX Sisters’ Novitiate

L etter from
the P ublisher
Dear Reader,

Fr. John Fullerton
District Superior of the
United States of America

I am pleased to welcome you to the second issue of The Angelus
following the new format inaugurated in the July/August edition.
The issue’s theme invites you to explore the important role
women have played in the Catholic Church from its divine
establishment through the present day. Rather than present
a “theory” of the proper role of women in the Church, we
have opted to provide informative and edifying accounts of
the myriad contributions that women have made to the Corpus
Mysticum through the centuries. Examples include the mystical
visions of St. Bridget of Sweden, the devout and intellectual life
of St. Catherine of Siena, and the heroic witness of the ladies of
Mexico. Of course, no series on women and the Church would
be complete without exploring the nearly unfathomable role the
greatest woman in history has played in the life of the Church,
namely the Mother of Our Lord, the Blessed Virgin Mary.
It is impossible to ignore, however, the manifold ways which
the forces of liberalism, modernism, and relativism have distorted
the appropriate role women have in both the Church and society.
Pernicious ideologies such as feminism and gender theory have
conspired to obscure the differences between the sexes in the
natural and supernatural realms. This has led to cries from within
the Church for such impossibilities as “women’s ordination,”
the forerunner of which has been a steady expansion of the role
of women in the Church’s liturgy as altar servers, lectors, and
even preachers. By focusing on the traditional role women have
undertaken in the Church since time immemorial, I hope this
issue presents a counterweight to contemporary errors.
In closing, I wish to also draw your attention to the “Faces New
and Old” section immediately following this letter. I am proud
that The Angelus will continue to feature its veteran contributors
while also making way for the next generation of Catholic voices
to continue the work of restoring Catholic Tradition.
Fr. John Fullerton
Publisher

ON OUR COVER: St. Catherine of Siena Holding the Child Jesus.

CONTENTS
Volume LXIV, Number 5

SEPTEMBER - OCTOBER 2021

Publisher
Fr. John Fullerton

2

FEATURED:

Editor-in-Chief
Mr. James Vogel

5

Managing Editor
Fr. Dominique Bourmaud

11

Assistant Editor
Mr. Gabriel Sanchez
Associate Editor
Miss Esther Jermann
Marketing Director
Mr. Ben Bielinski
Design and Layout
Mr. Simon Townshend
Mr. Victor Tan
Director of Operations
Mr. Brent Klaske

Faces New and Old: Introducing Our Regular Authors

Mater Misericordia: The Visions of St. Bridget of Sweden
Amy Fahey, Ph.D.

Hildegard von Bingen: Féminine Mystique
Dr. Andrew Childs, D.M.A.

CULTURE:
L ITERATURE Mary’s Not-So-Painless Labor:
16	

The Crucifixion as the Birth of the Church
Jonathan Wanner

23	
A RT A Lover for All Seasons:

The Song of Songs and the Madonna of the Quail
Prof. David Clayton

26	
H ISTORY What a Woman Must Do:

The Feminine Mystique Versus the Brigades of St. Joan of Arc
John Rao, D.Phil. Oxon.

31

THE SAINTS St. Catherine of Siena: Esto Vir

Michael Cassman

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

37

COMMENTARY Women’s Ordination

Michael Warren Davis

FAITH:
42

FROM THE ARCHBISHOP Sermon to the SSPX Sisters, April 10, 1983

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

47

APOLOGETICS The Relation of the Sexes

Pauper Peregrinus

50

LITURGICAL STUDIES The Consecration

Fr. Christopher Danel

54

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES Judging a Tree by Its Fruits

Fr. Alain Lorans, SSPX

69	
Q UESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Fr. Juan Carlos Iscara, SSPX

67

INTERVIEW with Fr. Jacques Emily, SSPX

Fr. Dominique Bourmaud, SSPX

73

THE LAST WORD

Fr. David Sherry, SSPX

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.
©2021 by Angelus Press. Official Publication of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X for the United States and Canada

AUTHORS

Faces New
and Old
Introducing Our Regular Authors

FR. DOMINIQUE BOURMAUD,
SSPX, Managing Editor
Fr. Bourmaud has spent the past 40 years
at various posts including teaching at the
SSPX seminaries in America, Argentina, and
Australia; doing regular parish work; being in
charge of the priests’ training program; and
editing/writing for Angelus Press. He is currently prior of St. Vincent’s in Kansas City.
DR. JOHN RAO, History
Dr. John C. Rao obtained his doctorate in Modern Eu­ropean History from Oxford University in
1977. He worked in 1978-1979 as
Eastern Director of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute in Bryn Mawr,
Pennsylvania and is now Associate Professor
of European History at St. John’s University
in New York City, where he has taught since
1979. Dr. Rao is also director of the Roman
Forum, a Catholic cultural organization. Perhaps the most important of his works are
Removing the Blindfold (Remnant Press, 1999;
2nd revised edition, The Angelus Press, 2014)),
and Americanism and the Collapse of the Church
in the United States (Roman Forum Press,
1995). He is married and lives in Manhattan
with his wife and three children.

2

The Angelus u September - October 2021

DR. ANDREW CHILDS, Music
Dr. Andrew Childs has served as Associate Dean, Humanities Chair, and Professor of Music at St. Mary’s College
since 2008. Previously, he taught
at Missouri State University, the
Yale University School of Drama,
the Thames Valley Music School
at Connecticut College, and served as
Managing Coordinator of the Department of
Voice and Opera at the Yale School of Music.
He earned his Bachelor of Music Degree
from the University of California, Irvine, and
his Doctor of Musical Arts degree from the
University of Washington. Appearances as
tenor soloist include those with Seattle Symphony, Seattle Opera, Glimmerglass Opera,
the Moravian Philharmonic Orchestra, the
American Symphony Orchestra, Harrisburg
Opera, Seattle Symphony Chorale, Society of
Composers International (SCI), Yale Camerata, Santa Barbara Quire of Voyces, Amato
Opera, Springfield Symphony, Connecticut
Master Chorale, Missouri Chamber Players,
Orchestra Seattle, Springfield Opera, Musica Vocale, and Te Deum Antiqua. Dr. Childs
has recorded for the Parma, Albany, Koch,
and Centaur labels. He has been published
by the Angelus Press and Catholic Family
News, and lectures throughout the country
on music and culture.

AUTHORS

PROF. DAVID CLAYTON, Art
David Clayton is an internationally
known artist, teacher, author, composer, and broadcaster. He moved
to the US from his native England
in 2009, to be Artist-in-Residence
at Thomas More College of Liberal Arts in New Hampshire. A graduate of Oxford University, he is Provost and a
founding faculty member of a new Catholic
university (www.Pontifex.University). Clayton
designed and implemented Pontifex’s Master
of Sacred Arts program, a formation for all
creatives based upon that given to great
artists of the past.
MR. JONATHAN WANNER,
Literature
Jonathan Wanner is a doctoral
candidate in English literature at
the Catholic University of America;
his chief academic interests include Shakespeare and the Metaphysical Poets, especially their ties to Renaissance prayer manuals, Catholic doctrine, and mysticism. In
addition to teaching writing and Latin, he
directs and composes sacred music at St.
Luke’s Ordinariate in Maryland. His
work has appeared in the St. Austin
Review, Dappled Things, Ecumenica,
and Every Day Fiction.
MR. MICHAEL WARREN DAVIS,
Opinion
Michael Warren Davis is the author, most
recently, of The Reactionary Mind (Regnery,
2021). He previously served as editor-in-chief
of Crisis Magazine and U.S. editor of the Catholic Herald. Read more at www.northofboston.blog.
MS. ESTHER JERMANN,
Assistant Editor, Book Reviews
Esther Jermann is a graduate of
the Thomas More College of Liberal Arts, an M.A./Ph.D student in
Medieval and Byzantine Studies at
Catholic University of America, and an Assistant Editor at Angelus Press, for which she
manages manuscript acquisitions and works
on the Angelus Magazine with Fr. Bourmaud.
She has homes in Kansas and Maryland.

MR. BEN BIELINSKI, Director of Sales
and Marketing, Book Reviews
Benjamin Bielinski is a Catholic
writer with a background in marketing, sales and media. He previously lived abroad in Poland as a
corporate, operations and logistics
manager for IBM. He is currently the
Director of Marketing and Sales at Angelus
Press. Early in his career he spent a number
of years at the Society of St. Pius X Seminary
in Winona, MN and a year in the Benedictine
Monastery of Silver City, NM.
FR. JUAN CARLOS ISCARA, SSPX,
Questions and Answers
Fr. Iscara is Argentinian, born in 1951. He
studied History in the “Instituto
Superior del Profesorado” and the
University of Buenos Aires, aiming at a specialization in ancient
Roman history. He was ordained
a priest at the seminary in La Reja
by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1986.
He served short stints at the priory in Wanganui (New Zealand) and at the seminary in
Goulburn (Australia). Later he became the
District Superior of Mexico. He has been
teaching Church History and Moral Theology at St. Thomas Aquinas seminary since
1993. He has published quite a few articles
in the Angelus Magazine, and speaks regularly
at priests’ meetings and the annual Angelus
Press conferences.
FR. CHRISTOPHER DANEL,
Liturgical Studies
Fr. Christopher Danel was
ordained in 2000. After completing the philosophical and theological curriculum, he took up specialization in the study of sacred liturgy, and is
stationed in Atlanta, Georgia.
PAUPER PEREGRINUS, Apologetics
Pauper Peregrinus is a priest ordained after
the year 2000, with a degree in sacred theology.
PATER INUTILIS, Scriptural Studies

3

4

The Angelus u September - October 2021

FEATURED

Mater Misericordia

The Visions of St. Bridget of Sweden
Dr. Amy Fahey

W

hen I was a young, intellectually curious undergraduate, my
rediscovery of the Faith coincided with a deep interest in
literature and language, and particularly in
the attempt to communicate religious experiences that are, essentially, ineffable. Looking
to study the writings of the Middle Ages in
graduate school, I found myself a semi-finalist
for the Rhodes Scholarship. I had outlined a
research project to study the use of language
in the writings of female medieval mystics—
women like St. Hildegard of Bingen and St.
Catherine of Siena. Female medieval mysticism was a “hot topic” among scholars in
those days, and my intention was to provide
a corrective to the emerging and dominant
radical feminist interpretations of the lives
and writings of these women.
My interview took place around a conference table filled with former Rhodes Scholars in an office building in my home state
of Michigan. Though predictably nervous,
I thought the conversation was off to a good
start, and then one man—a hard-headed auto
executive who spoke slowly and with preci-

sion—leaned forward, raised his hand to his
chin, and said, “I read somewhere that Catherine of Siena levitated. Do you think that’s
really true?”
Thus ended my aspirations to be a Rhodes
Scholar.
To the overly rational, scientific modern
mind, the lives of the saints, especially those
who experienced mystical visions, are not
simply a little odd—they’re positively crazy. In
the case of St. Birgitta of Sweden (1303-1373),
also known as St. Bridget, or, in England, St.
Bride, this is especially so. Devoted to meditating on the Passion of Christ since an initial
vision at the age of 10, she received a particular vision informing her of the exact number
of blows (5,480) Our Lord received during
His Passion, along with instructions for daily
prayers honoring each wound over the course
of a year. When the Blessed Mother told her
in a vision that she needed to learn Latin and
difficulties presented themselves, St. Agnes
came in visions to teach her. When the rule
for her new order, The Order of the Most
Holy Savior (later known simply as the Brigittines), was dictated to her verbatim by Our
5

FEATURED

Cross that spoke to St. Bridget, St. Paul
Outside the Walls, Rome.

Cutting from Burde der Welt, Cunradus Zeninger, 1481.

St. Bridget giving her rule to her order, 1480-1500, woodcut print on paper.

6

The Angelus u September - October 2021

Anonymous, St. Bridget woodcut
print, 1450-1500.

FEATURED

Lord, she spent the next twenty years (1350—1370) doggedly
petitioning the Pope to accept
it (he eventually did). She was
also granted numerous visions
of souls in both Purgatory and
Hell, depictions which rival in
intensity and terror anything
imagined by Dante.
It was Martin Luther who
nicknamed St. Bridget die tolle
Brigit—“that crazy Bridget”—
and made light of her revelations and prophecies. He, along
with Henry VIII, ushered in the
disastrous era that saw the suppression or destruction of all the
major Brigittine religious houses
in England and Europe, including the thriving Syon Abbey in England,
from which comes an early Middle English
translation of the original Latin account of
her visions: the Liber Celestis, or Heavenly
Book. (Though poverty was embraced by the
Brigittines, their joint religious houses were
allowed an unlimited number of books, and
St. Thomas More considered Syon Abbey
to have the best library in all of Europe.) It
is this Middle English version of St. Bridget’s visions, published in one volume by the
Early English Text Society, through which I
became introduced to the life and writings of
this amazing saint.
Despite her unparalleled popularity and
her influence on art, spirituality, and culture
in the Middle Ages, many Catholics—even
Catholic scholars—remain unfamiliar with her
life and writings. If they know this widowed
mother of eight at all, it is perhaps through
her powerful meditations on the Passion. Yet
for all their outrageousness—I would argue
because of it—the life and writings of St. Bridget are intensely edifying and instructive, and
her visions speak with particular urgency to
our own fractured age.
St. Bridget lived in a time of widespread
illness and contagion (only roughly 20%
of the population of her home territory of
Uppland survived the Black Plague), of pervasive immorality even among her own family members, of Church corruption at every

Syon Bridgettines, 1961.

level, of the collapse of law and order, even in
major cities like Rome. Her chief task, as she
experienced it through her revelations, was
to elevate the moral tone of the age. “How
stands the world now?” Christ asks his spiritual daughter at the outset of her visionary
journey. The saint responds: “It stands as an
open sack to whom all run, and as a man running who does not heed what will happen.”
One would be hard-pressed to find a better
description of the lives of many in our own
day. In Conversations with an Angel, a vision
which St. Bridget says was dictated to her
by an angel, she describes the degradation
of Rome:
Oh, my daughter, this city of Rome was in
times past a city in which dwelt the warriors
of Christ, its streets were strewn as if with gold
and silver. But now all its precious sapphires
are lying in the mire. . . . Toads and vipers
build here.

St. Bridget was deeply concerned with the
salvation of the least soul on earth—her early
work in Sweden was for the care of unwed
mothers and their infants, and her final vision
articulates Christ’s rebuke to the slaveowners
of Naples for not baptizing their “thralls” and
instructing them in the Faith:
The maisters will noght lerne thame ne
informe thame in the cristen mannes bileue,
ne how thai should have thame in resaiuinge
7

FEATURED

of the sacraments; and so thai can noght have
contricion and shrift as to be restorid to grace.
(The masters will not teach or inform them in
Christian men’s beliefs, nor do they allow them
to receive the sacraments, so they cannot have
contrition and penance in order to be restored
to grace).

Yet hers was essentially a “top down” approach
to Church reform, and in many of her visions,
Christ rebukes the temporal and spiritual
leaders of the age for their poor example and
grave injustices.
St. Bridget came from a long line of legal
experts—her father, Birgir Persson, was “Lawspeaker” for the Uppland district of Sweden—
and her visions emphasize Our Lord’s role
as “domesman” or judge of mankind. Many
of her visions take the form of a trial, with
demons coming forward to condemn and
“claim” the soul because of his iniquity on
earth. But time and again, St. Bridget pres-

ents God’s mercy, often at the last minute and
through slender but sincere acts of contrition,
charity, or penance on the part of the sinner,
as a stay against damnation. In her visions,
the essential role of Our Lady’s intercession,
as well as the prayers and petitions of the
Saints in Heaven and pious folks on earth, is
repeatedly emphasized. It is no exaggeration
to suggest that the beautiful devotional image
of Mary as the mater misericordia, or Mother
of Mercy, is largely the result of St. Bridget’s
compelling visions.
In one revelation, a fiend accuses a soul:
“O you rightful Judge, grant me this soul, and
hear his works; for now his life is near the end.
Allow me therefore to punish the body with
the soul, until they are separated.” The fiend
goes further, suggesting that if Our Lady “had
sinned mortally and died without goodly contrition, you love justice so that her soul should
never have got to Heaven, but it should have

Medieval painting inspired by St. Bridget’s vision of the Nativity when she was in Bethlehem. Her vision
ushered in a new form of Nativity painting in the fifteenth century, the Adoration of the Infant. St. Bridget
is seen in the lower right corner praying her beads.

8

The Angelus u September - October 2021

FEATURED

been with us in Hell. Therefore, Judge, why
do you not condemn this soul to us, that we
may punish it after his works.”
But with this impious speculation, the fiend
has gone too far. At these words, a blaring
sound of the trumpet is heard, and a voice
cries out: “Be still and listen angels, souls, and
fiends, to what the Mother of God speaks.”
The Virgin then appears before the Throne of
Judgment, “having under her mantle as it had
been some great private things,” and chastises
the demons: “O, you enemies, you persecute
mercy and without charity you love justice.”
She then says: “Yet see what I have under my
mantle.” When she opens her mantle, on one
side “appeared as like a little church, in which
seemed to be some men of religion” and on
the other “women, and men, friends of God
. . . they all cried with one voice saying, ‘Have
mercy, merciful Lord.’” The demons, before
shrinking away, attempt to trivialize this intercession of religious, saints, and Our Lady:
“‘We see,’ said they, ‘that in the world a little
water and great air balance out the anger of
God. And so by your prayer is God weighed
to mercy with charity.’”
St. Bridget makes it clear that intercessory prayer is anything but “a little water and
great air.” Of course, the soul, corrupted by
sin, must cooperate with and desire the mercy
offered by God and mediated by Our Lady
and the saints. Christ’s bitter sacrifice on the
Cross for the salvation of a sinful mankind
reminds us that salvation is available to even
the most vile of sinners. When St. Bridget,
toward the close of her life, journeys on pilgrimage to Jerusalem, Christ appears on the
Throne of Majesty and tells her that He
loued mankind als mekill now as that time that
he died on the crosse. For, if it were possibill,
yete wald he dye for mannes saule. (He loved
mankind as much now as when he died on the
cross. If it were possible, he would die again
for man’s soul.)

It is understandably difficult for Christians
to be reminded that God’s grace and mercy
are extended even to those who are the most
notorious public sinners of our age, be they
celebrities, politicians, or prelates. In one
of her most extended visions, “The Father

of Heaven showed to Saint Birgitta a severe
judgment upon a king who was unkind and
disobedient to the counsels of God.” In this
vision, souls in Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory
come forward to ask wrath upon the king and
all temporal rulers who mislead multitudes
and cause widespread suffering. Then follows
Abraham and the Patriarchs, the Prophets,
Evangelists, and Apostles, all of whom cry
judgment upon the rulers who have disobeyed
God and His precepts. After this extended
vision, which runs to several pages and presents overwhelming evidence of the condemnation of these earthly rulers, there occurs
a brief exchange which, in understated yet
powerful language, alters everything:
After all this, the Virgin who sat by the
Lamb said: “O most sweet Lord, have mercy
upon them.”
To her the Judge answered, “It is not right,”
he said, “to deny you any thing. Therefore they
who cease from sin and do worthy penance
shall find mercy; and judgment shall be turned
away from them.”

Over 3,000 words of condemnation are
rebutted in these eight simple words of Our
Lady.
Saint Bridget was canonized in 1391, just
eighteen years after her death. When Dame
Margery Kempe visited St. Bridget’s former
apartment in Rome not long after the canonization, she spoke there with Catherine of
Flanders, who had been a longtime serving
maid of St. Bridget and still occupied her mistress’ former home. Catherine described to
Dame Margery the saint’s perpetually joyful
countenance: “sche was goodly and meke to
euery creatur and that sche had a lawhyng
cher” (she was gentle and kind to every creature and she had a ‘laughing cheer,’ or cheerful face). To maintain such cheer in the midst
of constant trials and widespread corruption
is the task of every aspiring saint, and indeed
every Christian. As St. Bridget’s writings
remind us, it is a task made all the lighter by
the contemplation of the intercessory mantle
of Our Lady and the boundless mercy of Our
Lord.

9

Self-portrait by St. Hildegard.

10

The Angelus u September - October 2021

FEATURED

Hildegard von Bingen:
Féminine Mystique
Dr. Andrew Childs, D.M.A.

H

oly Mother Church: the name our
Faith gives the Church serves as
the point of departure in considering the current theme of women
and the Church. Enemies of the Bride of
Christ have always accused Her of misogyny, abuse, intimidation, and oppression, and
never more gleefully than in the cultural climate du jour, hell-bent on havocking all things
Holy and natural. Far from suppressing or
undervaluing women, however, the Church
not only submits to the absolute queenship of
the Blessed Virgin Mary but defines Herself
by two sublime feminine attributes—holiness
and maternity.
Hildegard von Bingen (1098-1179), the
“Sybil of the Rhine,” was a visionary, author,
composer, artist, naturalist, healer, abbess,
correspondent and counselor to political and
religious leaders, preacher, Saint, and Doctor of the Church. She was not a feminist.1
Since the early 20th century, Hildegard has
become the unlikely darling of a variety of
progressive causes. For the New Age theologians, her visions—both the often-obscure
allegorical written descriptions and mildly

psychedelic Medieval visual depictions—have
a cosmic appeal. Secular medical historians
apply a retrospective diagnosis of migraine
suffering to explain the nature of these images, dismissing the possibility of Divine inspiration. Adherents of homeopathy and naturopathy posit that her writings on herbal
cures and disease qualify her as a pioneer in
natural healing and suggest a “Green” sensibility. For social revolutionaries, her position
of authority as advisor and religious leader—and her perceived history of feisty opposition to the patriarchy—secure her standing
as a proto-feminist. Worse yet, but certainly
predictably, this last bunch speculate about
her sexuality, given her intimate friendships
with her consoeurs. The Saints do not suffer in
Heaven after death, but their reputations can
certainly take a beating here below.
The brief portrait that follows will likely
not convince Hildegard’s secular admirers
that her life and work inherently and magnificently oppose their progressive ideology. I do
hope, however, that for Catholic readers unfamiliar with the real Hildegard, they might
sympathize with the attempt to separate her
11

FEATURED

from the naturalists’ usurpation of her life and
work and will find in her a genuine source of
artistic wonder and spiritual inspiration.

founded a monastery near Bingen in Rupertsberg. Built between 1147 and 1150, Hildegard
oversaw construction, and the more zealous
of her admirers claim she acted as architect.
She founded a sister house in Eibingen in
1165, and by 1163, letters of protection written for her by Frederick Barbarossa refer to
her as abbess. 3

Hildegard the feminine
Early biographers identify Hildegard’s parents as Hildebert and Mechtilda and classify
them as belonging to the noble class, though
record no family name. Hildebert served as
Hildegard the mystical
a soldier under Meginhard, Count of Spanheim in Rhenish Franconia. Born the last of
In 1912, British physician Charles Singer
10 children in 1098, every reference to Hilmoved to Wiesbaden. Married to a mediedegard as a child describes her as “weak and
valist, Singer had developed a keen interest
sickly.” Due in large part to this frailty, she
in history, and through academic connecreceived little formal education as a child, and
tions, gained access to the manuscript of
her parents promised her to God, assigning
Hildegard’s Scivias, the three-volume set of
her at the age of eight to the service of the
twenty-six prophetic visions with illuminaanchoress Jutta of Spanheim, sister of Count
tion written between 1141-1150. Intrigued
Meginhard. Jutta had
by what he saw in the
rejected all offers of
illustrations, he “recognized at once that
marriage and lived as
a recluse in a cell conthe figures…resemstructed by her father
bled descriptions by
attached to the Benepatients of what they
dictine monastery of
ha d seem du r i ng
Disibodenberg. As an
attacks of migraine.”4
anchoress, she took a
Seven hundred-fifty
vow never to leave her
years after her death,
cell, but she assisted
Singer pronounced
the monks through
a retrospective diagprayer and domestic
nosis de-mystifying
tasks. She could conthe mystic. Historiverse with visitors,
an Katherine Foxhall
and developed a folkeenly and succinctly
lowing large enough
finds motive, writing,
to require the conUsing his medical
st r uct ion of add iknowledge to render
tional cells adjoining
the unusual patterns in
the monastery. She
Hildegard’s religious
would take certain of
imagery as the manthese followers to live
ifestation of a neurological disorder was
in her cell as assisChrist by St. Hildegard.
important because it
tants, the case with
enabled Singer to sideHildegard. Hildegard learned to read Latin
line Hildegard’s theology and replace it with
and to chant the Psalter, though no sure proof
“science” as the basis for her philosophy of
exists that she ever learned to write. In 1113
the world.5
she took the veil, and when Jutta died in 1136,
Hildegard became the superior of the small
From an early age, Hildegard had visioncommunity.2
ary episodes, which often came on in specAgainst the wishes of the abbot, Hildetacular fashion, accompanied by blinding
gard left the monastery at Disibodenberg and
light, and rendered her motionless. She would
12

The Angelus u September - October 2021

FEATURED

initially describe these occurrences to Jutta
the Scivias coherent orthodoxy rather than a
migraineur’s hallucination.
and others as a simple matter of fact, but as
people became more uneasy with the often
Hildegard the artistic
highly involved and disturbingly detailed
In Canto XI of the Inferno, Dante states
nature of her visions, she became more reluc“Art
is the grandchild of God.”8 Attribution
tant to share them. “Up to my fifteenth year,”
to Hildegard of her writings, artistic images,
she wrote, “I saw much, and related some of
and music provokes no controversy, yet many
the things seen to others, who would inquire
scholars agree that other individuals did the
with astonishment, whence such things might
physical work of making the art—painting piccome. I also wondered and during my sicktures, writing texts, notating music. Though
ness I asked one of my nurses whether she
not uncommon in medieval times (when artalso saw similar things. When she answered
ists assumed anonymity), this also represents
no, a great fear befell me. Frequently, in my
a beautiful metaphoric reminder of the relaconversations, I would relate future things,
tionship between artistic inspiration and
which I saw as if present, but noticing the
expression: as God guides the hand of the
amazement of my listeners, I become more
artist, Hildegard directed specifically talreticent.”6 She had always considered the illented artists to bring her impulses to life.
ness accompanying her visions as God’s disHildegard’s colpleasure, but in one
lected output in literparticularly intense
ature (prose, poetry,
episode she experiand technical writenced at the age of
ings), painting, corforty, she heard the
respondence, a nd
voice of God commusic remains one of
manding her to write
the most impressive
and put down what
and important bodies
she heard and saw.
of work by an indiWith the approval
vidual in the medieof the Archbishop of
val era. Beyond the
Mainz, the encourScivias, writings on
agement of St. Berspirituality and thenard, and ultimateology include Liber
ly a directive from
Vitae Meritum (Book
Pope Eugene III,
of Life’s Merits, 1158she set about the
1163), and the Liber
ten years’ work of
Divinorum Operum
the Scivias. Visions
(Book of Divine Works,
include “God, the
1163-1172). Writings
L i g h t - G i ve r a n d
on science and medHu ma n it y,” “ T he
icine include PhysiFall,” “The Choirs of
ca which describes
Angels,” “The TriCosmos by St. Hildegard.
cha
racter ist ics a nd
une God,” “The Sacriproperties of animals, plants, and minerals;
fice of Christ and the Church,” “The Zeal of
and Causae et Curae which exhaustively (in 530
God,” and “The End of Time.” The text is “an
chapters) considers the human being, physiextraordinary production and hard to undercally and functionally, in health and sickness,
stand, prophetic throughout and admonitory
in the context of the created order. The latest
after the manner of Ezechiel and the Apocascholarship numbers her letters—to Popes (4 of
lypse.”7 Hildegard filled the paintings, though
them), Kings (2), Archbishops (10), Bishops (9),
brilliant and bold, with easily recognizable
Abbots (49), Abbesses (23), Priests, Religious,
Christian imagery. One reads and sees in
13

Vision of the Angelic Hierarchy by St. Hildegard.

and lay people (including excommunicants)—
at 353. She wrote fifty homilies and developed
her own language, the “Lingua Ignota,” complete with its own alphabet.
Her visual style exhibits standard medieval characteristics—iconographic Christian
symbolism, bright colors, bold shapes and figures—but remains remarkable for its allegorical concision, frequently capturing in single
panels the essence of highly complicated theological constructs and relationships. Whether
disturbing—Vision of the Last Days—or hauntingly lovely—The Universe, The true Trinity in
true Unity—the images at once occupy a place
in and out of stylistic time.
For Hildegard, poetry and music unite.
Of her poetic style Barbara Newman writes,
“Hidegard’s poetic world is like the Sybil’s
cave; difficult to access, reverberating with
cryptic echoes. The oracle’s message, once
interpreted, may or may not hold surprises… No formal poetry written in the twelfth
century, and none that Hildegard might have
14

The Angelus u September - October 2021

known, is very much like hers. For models one must look, rather, to the rich
corpus of liturgical prayer.” 9 Just as
her pictures illuminated her visions,
her music gives soul to her poetic
lyrics. Her output includes some
seventy compositions—hymns,
sequences, and antiphons, all on
religious themes—and the Ordo
Virtutum (The Order of the Virtues,
1151), a morality play set to music
that could qualify as the first fully-conceived opera, nearly five
centuries before Monteverdi. In
the Ordo, Hildegard presents the
dramatic struggle between the Virtues and the Devil for a soul. Seventeen individual virtues, the soul, a
women’s chorus of souls, a men’s chorus of Prophets and Patriarchs, and the
character of Hildegard sing the score; the
male character of the Devil—who according
to Hildegard, “cannot produce divine harmony”—yells or grunts.
If her art outpaces stylistic characterization, her music flies away. The overwhelming
majority of medieval music remains locked
in time and stylistic space, often severe and
angular. Hildegard’s music, constructed
almost entirely of motivic melodic formulae,
employs a stunningly wide melodic range,
and implies mysterious harmonies, timeless
and hypnotically beautiful. From the majestic
and mysterious O vis aeternitatis to the rhapsodic O spendissima Gemma and the playfully joyous O virdissima Virga, the music and
words not only support each other, but seem
to frolic together. In her music, Hildegard
expresses mystical orthodoxy with astonishing freshness.

Hildegard the Saint
The cultus of Hildegard developed before
her death, and firmly established itself immediately after. Six months before she died,
however, she and her community languished
under interdict. The bishop of Mainz had
demanded the exhumation of the body of a
previously excommunicated young nobleman from the cemetery adjacent her convent.
Arguing that the man had received last rites

FEATURED

before burial, thus proving his reconciliation
with the Church, Hildegard refused. The
bishop pronounced the sentence, with the
specific indication forbidding the singing of
the Office: deprived of their voices—barred
from producing “divine harmony”—they could
only whisper. Hildegard and her community
submitted to the punishment, but she began
an intense series of correspondence, and the
bishop lifted the sentence in March of 1179.
Hildegard died on September 17, 1179.
Gregory IX (r. 1227-41) opened her cause
for canonization, which Innocent IV (r. 124354) continued, and Clement V (1305-14) and
John XXII (1316-34) repeated. Listed in the
Martyrology, and having remained on regional liturgical calendars for centuries, Benedict XVI declared her a Saint on May 10,
2012, and on October 7, 2012, a Doctor of
the Church. The Church places her Feast on
September 17, the anniversary of her death.
“She would have been extraordinary,”
writes Barbara Newman, “in any age. But
for a woman of the 12th century, hedged by
the constraints of a misogynist world, her
achievements baffle thought, marking her as a
figure so exceptional that posterity has found
it hard to take her measure.”10 The things of
eternity defy measure. Her secular admirers,
hedged by the constraints of a worldview
willfully ignorant of supernatural reality,
see Hildegard as an extraordinary woman
who created an artistic ethos in defiance of
the order imposed on her by men. We, who
believe as she believed, venerate her as a Saint

inspired and liberated by God, whose vision
and expression of supernatural beauty open
on to the divine.
St. Hildegard, Feather on the Breath of
God, ora pro nobis.

Endnotes:
1

And I do not refer lightly to the canonical feminist work noted
in the second half of this article’s title [Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique (New York: W.W. Norton, 1963)], which shows
a clear distaste for both the feminine and the mystical.

2

The Catholic Encyclopedia (New York: Appleton, 1910); Volume
7, 351-353.

3

The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (London: Macmillan, 1995); Volume 8, 553-556.

4

Charles Singer, From Magic to Science (New York: Dover, 1958);
viii.

5

Katherin Foxhall, “Making Modern Migraine Medieval: Men
of Science, Hildegard of Bingen and the Life of a Retrospective Diagnosis,” Cambridge Journal of Medical History (58/3, July
2014); 354-372.

6

The Catholic Encyclopedia (New York: Appleton, 1910); Volume
7, 351-353

7

Ibid.

8

Dante Alighieri, Mark Musa, editor and translator, The Portable Dante (New York: Penguin, 2003); 60.

9

Barbara Newman, Vision: the Life and Music of Hildegard von
Bingen (New York: Penguin, 1995); 69.

10

Barbara Newman, Voice of the Living Light: Hildegard von Bingen
and her World (Berkeley: UC Press, 1998); 1.

15

LITERATURE

Mary’s Not-SoPainless Labor
The Crucifixion as the
Birth of the Church
Jonathan Wanner

M

ost devout Catholics would be
hard-pressed to think of a Marian poem outside of the familiar chants, carols, and hymns
that rightfully hold a sacrosanct place in the
liturgy. Where would one even begin such
a search? Certainly, the corpus of Richard
Crashaw would be one of the last hiding-spots
one might explore. As a lesser-known Baroque
poet, his England had little of the Marian
enchantment that brands so many Late Medieval poems and miracle legends. He lived,
after all, in the wake of Elizabeth I—a Queen
who redirected Marian devotion to herself,
appropriating such Marian symbols as the
rose, the moon, the star, the phoenix, and the
pearl.1 Yet, just as the greatest heroes are bred
from the most terrible wars, so too the finest
Marian poems might find fertile ground in
soil that is otherwise hostile toward Our Lady.
There is a reason why Crashaw’s “Lady
lyrics” are a garden well worth forking: with
skull-cracking wit, he cross-pollinates Marian
dogmas, the devotion to Her Seven Sorrows,
and Patristic teachings. Most of the poems
are epigrams—brief word-puzzles that use riddling language such as metaphors and irony
to turn common observations into rare and
memorable insights. Crashaw is especially
16

The Angelus u September - October 2021

interested in the electrifying reversals that
one may encounter when reading the Church
Fathers: Mary is a virgin, a “fountain seal’d,”
even while a mother2; Eve’s disobedience slew
man, yet Mary “the maiden Eve’s” obedience
saved him3; Mary is God’s “faithful daughter,”
yet Christ’s “mother.”4 One reversal, however,
stands out for its rarity: the notion that Mary’s
birthing pangs occurred not at Christ’s nativity, but at the nativity of the Church. It is the
central theme of his Latin epigram “On the
Easy Birth of the Blessed Virgin” [In partum
B. Virg. Non difficilem]:5
Nec facta est tamen illa Parens impune; quod
almi
Tam parcens uteri venerit ille Puer.
Una haec nascentis quodcunque pepercerit
hora,
Toto illum vitae tempore parturijt
Gaudia parturientis erat semel ille parenti;
Quotidie gemitus parturientis erat
Nor was she made a mother without
punishment; Even though that Boy
Came from her nurturing womb very
much sparing her [pain].

LITERATURE

Whatever (agony) that single hour of
birth had spared,
She was in labor with him her whole life
long.
Once he was the joys of his mother’s
laboring;
Then daily he was the groans of her
laboring.
The poem’s first stanza alludes to the
time-honored tradition that Mary experienced childbirth “without punishment,” i.e.
without pain. Theologians usually derive this
conclusion from Mary’s Immaculate Conception: because Mary was preserved from the
stain of original sin, she would have been
spared the birthing pangs that punished Eve
for her first disobedience (Gen. 3:16). A similar argument excuses Mary’s birth pangs on
account of her perpetual virginity. Any mother would have maternal badges of suffering,
such as stretch marks and varicose veins;
Mary’s virginal body, however, remained
miraculously intact throughout the entire process of Jesus’ birth.6 In the words of Crashaw,
“The door was shut, yet let in day, / The fountain seald, yet life found way.”7 If her body
exhibited no signs of birthing pains, surely it
is because the Nativity was solely a pleasure.
To skeptics, the notion of a painless Nativity seems to defy the Blessed Virgin’s humanity. Surely Our Lady cannot be an authentic
mother if she did not endure every mother’s “rite of passage.” Women simply cannot
relate—not to a Mary who, like a fairy, appears
human but is a goddess in disguise—a goddess
who needs no Tylenol, no epidural because
God gave her a “Get Out of Pain Free” card.
Yet, Crashaw never insists that Mary lived
altogether free from pain. As the second and
third stanzas suggest, the “single hour” of a
joyful nativity would soon become a “whole
life” of “groans”8; Mary would endure a martyrdom, not in a moment, but throughout her
life. One need only glance over her Seven
Sorrows to recollect a few of the “groaning”
moments that Crashaw is alluding to here:
1. The prophecy of Simeon (Luke 2:25-35)
2. The flight into Egypt (Matthew 2:13-15)
3. Loss of the Child Jesus for
three days (Luke 2:41-50)

4. Mary meets Jesus on His way to
Calvary (Luke 23:27-31; John 19:17)
5. Crucifixion and Death of
Jesus ( John 19:25-30)
6. The body of Jesus being taken from the
Cross (Luke 23:50-54; John 19:31-37)
7. The burial of Jesus (Isaiah 53:8; Luke
23:50-56; John 19:38-42; Mark 15:40-47)
For Crashaw, the one-time joy of Christ’s
birth gives way to “daily” labor pains—not
because Mary’s womb would suffer daily
contractions, but because she must routinely
grieve during Christ’s infancy, boyhood, and
manhood. In this respect, she “was in labor
with him her whole life long.”
With ironic wit, the final stanza surprises us with the realization that Mary’s labor
pangs are actually the pains Christ suffered
on behalf of the Church: “Once he was the
joys of his mother’s laboring; / Then daily he
was the groans of her laboring.” 9 Here Christ
“was the groans” of Mary’s labor because His
Crucifixion figuratively begot the Church.
Christ himself alludes to his Passion in terms
of childbirth in John 16:21. Just as a woman
“in labor hath sorrow” then afterward rejoices
“that a man is born,” so too Christ endured
agony to bring forth the Church.10 To some,
the image of Christ “birthing” the Church
seems odd, even improper: Christ, after all,
is neither a woman nor pregnant, and the
Church is not literally a rosy-skinned newborn. Crashaw, however, is not asking us to
fixate on Christ’s body as if it were feminine.
The poem, rather, focuses on two similarities
that childbirth and the Crucifixion share—sorrow and new life.
The significance of these two similarities
comes to light when we consider the Patristic tradition that Christ birthed the Church
from his pierced side. As St. John Chrysostom
explains, the water and blood that issued from
Christ’s spear-wound, symbolizing Baptism
and the Eucharist respectively, poured out for
humanity the fundamental sacraments that
“give rebirth and renewal through the Holy
Spirit,” so that “From these two sacraments
the Church is born.”11 The word “born,” in
this case, is especially fitting because Eve’s
birth from Adam’s side is a typological reference to the Church’s birth from Christ’s side:
17

LITERATURE

Above, God delivers Eve from Adam’s side. Below, He
delivers Ecclesia from Christ’s side.
Bible moralisèe: The Creation of Eve and The Birth
of Ecclesia, fol. 2v (detail), ONB Han. Cod. 2554,
Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna. Made in
Paris, 1225–49.

18

The Angelus u September - October 2021

“As God then took a rib from Adam`s side
to fashion a woman, so Christ has given us
blood and water from his side to fashion the
Church. God took the rib when Adam was
in a deep sleep, and in the same way Christ
gave us the blood and water after his own
death.”12 Returning to Crashaw’s epigram, we
find the notion of Ecclesia’s birth enriches and
clarifies the final stanza. Christ, as Crashaw
says, “was the groans of her [Mary’s] labor,”
because Christ figuratively suffered the labor
pangs Mary was spared when He birthed the
Church.13
Just as Mary’s labor pangs were Christ’s, so
too Christ’s labor pangs were Mary’s. Mary
may not have been the primary “birther” of
the Church—her blood and water did not spill
from Christ’s side—but she endured Christ’s
travail by imitating His pain as perfectly as a
human may. As St. Lawrence Justinian says,
“The heart of the Virgin was made the brightest mirror of Christ’s Passion … The Son was
crucified in body, the Mother in mind.”14
Crashaw’s epigram, due to its brevity, does not
elaborate upon how Mary is a mirror of the
Passion, but we can imagine what Crashaw
means by considering his poetic paraphrase
of the Stabat Mater: “Sancta Maria Dolorum.”
Mary is so much Christ’s likeness, that “Each
wound of His” is “All, more at home in her
owne heart.”15 Mary and Christ “Discourse
alternate wounds to another,” so that whatever injury Christ endures, Mary experiences in a different form.16 When Christ’s body
“weeps Blood,” Mary’s eyes “bleed T ears.”17
Christ’s nails “write swords” in Mary’s heart,
and these in turn “growing with his pain, /
Turn Speares” and return to Christ again.18
This union—that Mary becomes an Image
of her Son crucified—is the ultimate irony of
Crashaw’s epigram, since it means that the
pain she was spared at Christ’s birth was figuratively realized at His death, the Church’s
Nativity. In the words of St. John Damascene,
“The Virgin suffered at the Passion the pangs
she escaped in child-birth.”19
By “laboring” with Christ at his Crucifixion, Mary reversed Eve’s punishment (Gen.
3:16), making of it a happy fault. As much as
the Old Eve slew all, Mary the “New Eve”
conceived our sacramental life, not only birth-

LITERATURE

ing Christ, but mirroring his pierced side
in her heart. Looking to her, mothers can
find empathy in the painful nativity of the
Church, even if they struggle to relate to the
painless nativity of Christ. By the singular
gift of labor pangs, women may become, like
Mary, a looking glass of Christ’s wounds.
Like Mary’s, a mother’s martyrdom is rarely
in one moment, but throughout a life, as the
“birthing pains” continue through her newborn’s infancy, childhood, and adulthood. By
her child, her sanctity is reared. By her body’s
laboring, her soul may find itself a child at
Christ’s sacramental side, where if she will
not bleed with Him, she at least may weep
with His mother.
Endnotes:
1

McClure, Peter, and Robin Headlam Wells, “Elizabeth I as a
Second Virgin Mary,” Renaissance Studies 4, no. 1 (1990): 39.

2

Richard Crashaw, “O Gloriosa Domina,” The Complete Poetry
of Richard Crashaw (New York: New York University Press,
1972), line 36.

3

Crashaw, “O Gloriosa Domina,” line 26.

4

Crashaw, “Luke 1:38, To the Blessed Virgin, Believing,” line
4.

5

Note: The English translation is my own. Richard Crashaw,
“In partum B. Virg. Non difficilem,” The Complete Poetry of
Richard Crashaw (New York: New York University Press,
1972), 265.

6

CCC 499, citing Lumen Gentium, 57.

7

Richard Crashaw, “O Gloriosa Domina,” The Complete Poetry
of Richard Crashaw (New York: New York University Press,
1972), lines 35-36.

8

Richard Crashaw, “In partum B. Virg. Non difficilem,” The
Complete Poetry of Richard Crashaw (New York: New York University Press, 1972), lines 4, 6.

9

Richard Crashaw, “In partum B. Virg. Non difficilem,” The
Complete Poetry of Richard Crashaw (New York: New York University Press, 1972), lines 5-6.

10

Douay-Rheims Bible

11

From the “Catecheses” by St. John Chrysostom, bishop (Cat.
3, 13-19; SC 50, 174-177).

12

Ibid.

13

Richard Crashaw, “In partum B. Virg. Non difficilem,” The
Complete Poetry of Richard Crashaw (New York: New York University Press, 1972), line 6.

14

Cornelius à Lapide, “The Great Commentary of Cornelius À
Lapide: S. Matthew’s Gospel—Chaps. 22 to 28 and S. Mark’s
Gospel—Complete,” trans. Thomas W. Mossman, Third Edition, vol. 3 (London: John Hodges, 1891), 249–325.

15

Richard Crashaw, “Sancta Maria Dolorum,” The Complete
Poetry of Richard Crashaw (New York: New York University
Press, 1972), lines 9-10.

16

Ibid., Line 24.

Scivias Codex, Virgin Birth

17

Ibid., Lines 19-20.

18

Ibid., Line 27, 29-30.

19

Cornelius à Lapide, “The Great Commentary of Cornelius À
Lapide: S. Matthew’s Gospel—Chaps. 22 to 28 and S. Mark’s
Gospel—Complete,” trans. Thomas W. Mossman, Third Edition, vol. 3 (London: John Hodges, 1891), 249–325.

19

“When I was forty-two years and seven months old,
Heaven was opened and a fiery light of exceeding
brilliance came and permeated my whole brain,
and inflamed my whole heart and my whole breast, not like a burning but like a warming flame, as
the sun warms anything its rays touch. And immediately I knew the meaning of the exposition of
scriptures, namely the Psalter, the Gospel and the
other Catholic volumes of both the Old and New
Testaments, though I did not have the interpretation of the words of their texts or the division of the
syllables or the knowledge of cases or tenses. But
I had sensed in myself wonderfully the power and
mystery of secret and admirable visions from my
childhood—that is, from the age of five—up to that
time as I do now.”—St. Hildegard, Scivias
Christ Glorified in the Court of Paradise, 1423-24, Fra Angelico.

ART

A Lover for
All Seasons

The Song of Songs and
the Madonna of the Quail
Prof. David Clayton

H

ow do you paint the love of God?
Love is not something we will ever
see directly, and this creates difficulties for artists who work in a
purely visual medium. The answer for many
who wish to represent the greatest virtue has
been to seek inspiration in the allegorical
account of God’s love in the Song of Songs,
and in Mary, the great lover and most beloved
Mother of God.
Fair in every part, my true love, no fault in all thy
fashioning!
Venture forth from Lebanon, and come to me, my
bride, my queen that shall be! Leave Amana
behind thee, Sanir and Hermon heights, where
the lairs of lions are, where the leopards roam
the hills.
What a wound thou hast made, my bride, my true
love, what a wound thou hast made in this heart
of mine! And all with one glance of an eye, all
with one ringlet straying on thy neck!
Sweet, sweet are thy caresses, my bride, my true
love; wine cannot ravish the senses like that

embrace, nor any spices match the perfume that
breathes from thee.
Sweet are thy lips, my bride, as honey dripping
from its comb; honey-sweet thy tongue, and
soft as milk; the perfume of thy garments is
very incense.
My bride, my true love, a garden enclosed; hedged
all about, a fountain shut in and sealed! What
wealth of grace is here!
Well-ordered rows of pomegranates, tree of cypress
and tuft of nard; no lack there whether of
spikenard or saffron, of calamus, cinnamon,
or incense-tree, of myrrh, aloes or any rarest
perfume.
A stream bordered with garden; water so fresh never
came tumbling down from Lebanon.
North wind, awake; wind of the south, awake and
come; blow through this garden of mine, and set
its fragrance all astir. (Song of Songs 4:7-16)
By tradition, the eight chapters of the Song
of Songs describe the love of Solomon and one
of his wives for each other in lyrical-dramatic
scenes and reciprocal songs, each addressing
the other in turn.
23

ART

Commentators have seen the account
of romantic love between Solomon and his
beloved as an allegory that reveals some of
the mystery of the nature of God’s love, as
multifaceted and superabundant. It has been
interpreted, for example, as a symbol of the
love of God for his chosen people, Israel; of
Christ for his Church; of Christ for each of
us, as members of the Church; of God for all
humanity; of the Father for the Son; and of
the Father for the Mother of God. It is the last
example that we consider today.
The variety of loves that it represents tell
us of the multi-faceted nature of God’s love.
We might say that God’s love is a simple single utterance that is, paradoxically, infinitely
faceted and deep. Human love, therefore, for
all the intense passion we read in this book,
is but a pale imitation of a tiny part of the
greater love that it points to.
The interchange of love in the Song of Songs
takes place in a secluded and beautiful garden. But at times the imagery blurs the distinction between the protagonists and their
setting, so that the people are likened to the
beautiful and fruitful plants and animals within the garden. Most powerfully, as in the passage quoted above, the beloved becomes the
garden itself. This emphasizes that the beauty
of all creation, and the fruitfulness and fertility that we see in it, are all perceptible signs
of God’s immense love.
It is interesting to note also that in the
course of the Song of Songs’ eight chapters,
the voice of the lover switches. The book is
written as a first-person narrative, in which
the lover describes the beloved to the reader
or addresses the beloved directly. This style
never changes. But what does change periodically, without warning or explanation, is
the subject who is speaking. At one moment,
the narrator addressing us is the bridegroom
speaking to and of his bride; the next the narrator is the bride addressing the bridegroom.
This flipping of the subject occurs several
times, and is a key to understanding an aspect
of the Christian ideal of love that is exactly
contrary to the caricature that is portrayed by
ardent critics of Christianity today.
Christian or not, few I suggest would
argue with the idea that when true love
24

The Angelus u September - October 2021

exists between two people, both are lover
and beloved in the relationship, interacting
in a dynamic exchange of love. The regular
change of narrator communicates to us that
natural kind of loving interaction.
The steady and rich flow of love between
them is a constant element. It is as though this
canticle is not so much about the lovers as it
is about love.
One traditional pictorial representation of
God’s love as described in the Song of Songs,
focuses on the interpretation of the Song of
Songs as an allegory of the Father’s love for
Mary, the Mother of God. In Latin this genre
of paintings is called Hortus conclusus—garden
enclosed—and Fons signatus—sealed fountain,
taking inspiration from from verse 4:12: “She
is a garden enclosed, my sister, my promised
bride; a garden enclosed, a sealed fountain.”
This image of the Mother and her Son, the
two greatest lovers, was painted in Italy in the
15th century in the late Gothic style by the
artist Pisanello. The art of this period is also
known as quattrocento, from the Italian for the
1400s. The artist was known for his studies of
birds and nature and he has included many in
this painting. He represents the rose garden
in great detail and it is known as the Virgin
of the Quail, for the large bird painted bottom right.
This is as much a painting of Mary as the
garden, as it is of her in the garden. I love
the graceful flow of the lines in the drapery
and the gentle touch of the hands on her Son,
emphasized by the artist in enlarging the
hands beyond natural proportions as they
draw the Son and Mother into a an embrace.
The balanced, simple, and harmonious
flow of the broad design is embellished with
gorgeous detail in the portrayal of the flora
and fauna (which extends into the design of
the embossing in the gold in the upper part
of the painting). Gold is used to suggest the
heavenly dimension and we see two angels
crown her as Queen of heaven.
The Mother of God is likened by the
Church Fathers to a garden because of her
fertility as a perfect mother, and the source
of the cultivation of the new Tree of Life,
which was originally in the Garden of Eden
and described in the book of Genesis. The

ART

Fall, which took place in Eden, resulted from
Adam and Eve succumbing to temptation and
eating the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge
of Good and Evil. St. Ephraim the Syrian, a
Christian commentator from the fourth century who was declared a Doctor of the Church
in 1920 by Pope Benedict XV, believed that
Adam and Eve were subsequently expelled
from Eden to prevent them from eating of the
Tree of Life. Had they eaten the fruit of the
Tree of Life, he says, it would have resulted in
their living forever in
the misery of their fallen state. With Christ’s
establishment of his
Church, Christians
in communion with
the Church are now
able to eat the fruit of
the Tree of Life, the
fruit of which is Christ
himself present in the
Eucharist. By this, we
are permitted to live
forever, partaking of
the divine nature.
Mary is not only
the garden, she is also
the fons conclusus, a
fountain of life sealed
by her perpetual virginity. The image of
living, that is, flowing,
water is often connected to the Spirit that
brings life out the dry
ground of our hearts
and leads us to eternal life. So the Virgin
is a garden, watered
by the living water of
the Holy Spirit, from
wh ich spr i ng s t he
Tree of Life, Christ.

The garden is enclosed and the fountain
sealed because she remains perpetually a
virgin.
The Mother both the lover and the beloved
of the Father. As such she is most beloved and
the great lover of God, both active and passive. She is the greatest lover in the human
race, aside from Christ himself.
We should all look to Mary, therefore, in
the hope of perfecting the pattern of our love
of others.

Page from a German
blockbook, Canticum
Canticorum (ca. 1469).
25

HISTORY

What a Woman
Must Do
The Feminine Mystique Versus
the Brigades of St. Joan of Arc
John Rao, D. Phil. Oxon.

F

orgive me for beginning this article for The Angelus issue on women
with reference to a term associated
by most Americans with the title of
a book published by Betty Friedan in 1963
that played a central role in launching the
Feminist Movement in the United States.
The reason why I feel compelled to do so is
because the word “mystique,” employed in
this context, has a very serious and specifically twentieth-century Catholic history to it.
A brief glance at this background introduces
us to a modern Catholic teaching concerning
what it is that a woman who wants to be a
“real Christian woman” must do if she wishes
to “fulfill her potential” and perfect herself.
Not surprisingly, that teaching is totally contradictory to traditional Catholic thought on
this subject, the nature of which I would like
to illustrate through an example offered by
Mexican women at the time of the Cristeros
War of 1926-1929.
Use of the word “mystique” was popularized in the 1920s and 1930s, primarily in
26

The Angelus u September - October 2021

France, Germany, and Belgium, from three
interconnected sources: the lay promoters of
the many-headed philosophy known as “Personalism,” Dominicans and Jesuits spreading what eventually became known as “New
Theology,” and monks eager for a “pastoral” as opposed to a God-centered liturgical
reform. Those embracing this term pressed
both missionaries as well as militants engaged
in so-called “Specialized Catholic Action”
among youth and workers to the conclusion
that their essential evangelical task was that of
recognizing the particular “spirit”—again, the
“mystique”—most passionately stimulating the
distinct group to which they ministered. Once
that specific, invigorating mystique had been
isolated, the labor of the activist then became
one of “witnessing” to its obvious inherent
value, since it could not possibly exercise
the vital, passionate impact that it did on the
groups in question unless the Holy Spirit were
somehow behind it, moving its members away
from narrow, self-interested, purely individual goals towards full Christian perfection as

HISTORY

communal-minded “persons.”
What might be labeled the ideology of
“mystique-ism” is really nothing more than
yet another naturalist Enlightenment recipe
for accepting fallen nature on its own marred
terms, dressed up rhetorically by modern
sophistic arguments. Its association of the
voice of the Holy Spirit with “vital passions”
cannot help but hand over the teaching and
sacramental office to the strongest, most willful, most bullying elements of the communities that it targets, with all serious correction of
truly narrow sinfulness and real transformation in Christ being abandoned as obstacles to
the development of a Divine Plan whose real
character it so badly distorts. Under its spell,
the duty of Catholics becomes that of keeping
their mouths shut, “witnessing” to the triumph
of the human will masquerading as that of
God, and “accompanying” unrepentant bullies in their work of oppression and ultimate
self-destruction. “Mystique-ism” leads to the
perfection of monsters; not of Christians.
“Mystique” hunters of the 1920s and 1930s
were excited by the thought of witnessing
to and accompanying all the contemporary
vital forces around them, with Fascist and
Communist groups at the top of the list. Let
us briefly explore the deeply anti-Catholic
consequences for all communities following
such distorted guidelines for perfection by
returning to our current topic concerning the
large community encompassing half of the
human race: women. Under “mystique-ism’s”
dictates, willful, bullying women ready to
impose their uncorrected and sinful desires
upon all who share their gender become the
determinants of the “feminine mystique” to
which all Catholic evangelists must “witness.”
The Holy Spirit will brook no obstacles being
placed in their totally inward-looking, elitist,
self-degrading path. Both the Magisterium
as well as a pastoral-minded Liturgy must be
reshaped according to the purely naturalist
truths the oppressors reveal to us, along with
the ever more grotesque practical and moral
changes these entail. Toughness, corporate
aggressiveness, unrestrained ambition economically and politically, as well as joyful
openness to sexual promiscuity and abortion
become the marks of the fulfilled and perfect-

ed woman. Indeed, they become the signposts
pointing to the female Catholic saint as well.
Honest believers can easily smell a rat and
understand that “mystique-ism” exalts a revolutionary travesty of the meaning of feminine
fulfillment and perfection. For, as St. James
tells us in the Epistle bearing his name, every
good and perfect gift comes from outside of
us, from above, from the Father of Lights,
and not from heeding the inward desires of
souls that have been directed away from the
achievement of God’s good plan for man
and nature by Original Sin. When we look
purely to ourselves for the source of our perfection, we condemn our souls to shriveling
and death.
A truly Catholic example of identifying
“what a Christian woman must do” in this
earthly valley of tears, and at a moment when
changing circumstances seemed to call for
further and possibly unconventional action
on her part, comes from Mexico, in the very
same years that “mystique-ism” was rising to
the fore in Europe. Those wishing to explore
in greater detail what I will merely summarize
below should read an article by Sister Barbara
Miller, “The Role of Women in the Cristeros
Rebellion,” published in The Americas in January of 1984 (Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 303-323).
Most Americans are unaware of the brilliant Mexican Catholic Social Movement
born in the years preceding the Revolution
that erupted in 1910. This came to full maturity in battles against an increasingly anticlerical government in the decades that followed;
a conflict at first fought peacefully, but then
ultimately by force of arms in the Cristeros
War of 1926-1929. Part of that Movement was
distinctively feminine: the Union de Damas
Catolicas Mejicanas. Founded in 1912, the
Damas Catolicas really blossomed from 1920
onwards as one of the four central branches
of Blessed Anacleto Gonzalez Flores’ (18881927) national Union Popular and then his Liga
National Defensora de la Libertad Religiosa.
The Damas Catolicas recognized that Mexican society was facing many new problems
raising social justice and moral questions,
including those connected with young women
independently entering more and more into
the public workforce. Their answer to these
27

HISTORY

developments was not to investigate their
own passionate feelings about such matters,
followed by a call for alterations in Church
teaching, liturgy, and morality to respond to
them. Rather, it was to promote more extensive access to quality Catholic education and
devout reception of the Sacraments so as to be
able to confront the changing world around
them with a deeper understanding of the Faith
and the need for Grace: both of them coming
from outside themselves, “from above, from
the Father of Lights.”
It was to assure the proper fulfillment of
this outward-looking, basically educative
mission that the Damas in 1926 became more
activist than they had ever dreamed beforehand. During that year, the revolutionary
government significantly tightened its controls over the Roman Catholic Church, closing large numbers of Catholic schools and
expelling the teaching religious, many of
them women, many of them foreigners, from
their houses and the churches serving them.
The Damas moved from dispatching simple
letters of protest to militant street action, to
blocking the doors to schools and churches
from the entry of the troops sent to dislodge
religious from them. These latter actions
resulted in dramatic encounters with soldiers
and government ministers who often treated

the protestors brutally, beating and imprisoning numbers of them and even threatening
them with sexual violence. “Men of the whole
Republic, there are your models,” their journal, La Dama Catolica, proudly boasted on
May 1st, 1926, after the first of their women
had taken to the streets. “Go hide your shame
in the dark caverns of our forests.”
Calls to further, still more unconventional feminine action came by the end of that
year with the outbreak of actual hostilities
in the Cristeros War, to which the Liga gave
its full support and sought to direct. Once
again, women judged what was proper for
them to do in the midst of this terrible crisis
on the basis not of their passionate internal
feelings, but with reference to what needed
to be accomplished to ensure external access
to the teachings of the Faith and transforming sacramental grace. Dealing with the latter necessity became particularly dramatic
since the government’s effort to determine
which clerics it would or would not allow to
perform Church services had gone so far that
the bishops suspended all regular sacramental
activity to avoid it.
By June of 1927, Mexican women had
formed Las Brigadas Femeninas de Santa Juana
de Arco, to whose success they bound themselves with vows to resist the revolutionary

The Union of Mexican Catholic Ladies
was founded in 1912 for charitable and
philanthropic works.

Peaceful protesters standing against President Plutarco Calles’s law
forbidding religious practice in public.
28

The Angelus u September - October 2021

HISTORY

Viva Cristo Rey!

Women while mostly engaged in
gun and ammunition running, as
well as nursing, openly fought as
well.

government to the death. At their height,
these “Feminine Brigades of St. Joan of Arc”
numbered fifty six squadrons enrolling twenty five thousand militants. But their story is a
complicated one, their members including or
at least being aided by three types of women:
the señoras, the religiosas, and the jovenes.
As far as I can determine, the Damas Catolicas, composed mostly of middle- and upperclass women from the very start of their apostolate, formed the bulk of the señoras. These
women could not bring themselves to accept
an actual fighting role in the Cristeros War,
but did absolutely everything that they could
to support the cause. The Damas courageously remained the active, open “voice” of the
movement for the defense of Catholic freedom, printing broadsheets against the government and even organizing illegal processions in honor of Christ the King. Members
hid hunted priests and wounded fighters,
raising money to ransom captive prisoners
and provide for the families of those who
were fighting.
A second militant component, represented
by the religiosas, the female teaching religious,
played a less passive role. Unlike the señoras,
they either had to flee to Cristero-held territory or go underground, often living under
conditions of extreme harshness, moving
from den to den, and sometimes suffering an
imprisonment and bestial treatment therein. Their chief apostolate was to sustain the
spirit of the soldiers. They prepared meals for
and nursed Cristeros in towns in which they
could function openly, organizing espionage

networks for them in places where they had to
hide. In fact, they even told the great Cristero
General, Enrico Goristieta (1888-1929), that
they were ready to take up arms alongside
the regular male soldiery if absolutely necessary. “We were young,” one of them said later,
“but we suffered for Christ enthusiastically.
I am happy to have suffered in that time.”
They were ready to carry on “until victory or
death.” “Fulfillment of their personal needs”
meant nothing to them whatsoever.
Finally, the third segment, the jovenes, the
young, overwhelmingly lower-class in background, while also seemingly mostly engaged
in gun and ammunition running, as well as
nursing, openly fought as well. In June of
1929, one of the founders of the Brigadas, Luz
Laraza de Uribe, better known as “General”
Tesia Richaud, was captured, beaten and tortured. She died not for the victory of the feminine mystique but for the glory of her Savior,
her final words of “Viva Cristo Rey” preparing
her path to true perfection and eternal life
in heaven. Is it any wonder that one of the
Cristero leaders rhetorically asked the question: “What would the Mexican men be if the
Mexican women did not exist?” One answer
to that query is that they would have lacked
a brilliant example of what all Catholics must
do properly to “fulfill themselves.”
Señoras, religiosas, and jovenes all did what
they believed that they had to do in order to
keep the outside channels of the Faith and
Grace open to themselves and their loved
ones. Although the end of the Cristero War
was a messy one, involving much in the way
29

HISTORY

of betrayal of the cause by an all too accommodating Vatican and those Mexican bishops
in alliance with it, by 1940 the situation of
Catholics in that troubled country had significantly improved. Mexican women of all
of the three categories that appear to have
played some role in the general labor of the
Brigades of St. Joan of Arc then asked nothing better than to return to more quiet educative tasks to perfect and transform themselves in Christ.
Although an examination of the collapse
of civilizations provides us with the dreary sight of one sinking ship after another,
such gloom and doom is usually relieved by
the identification of at least some political,
social, or cultural vessel still sufficiently seaworthy to allow those seeking to escape a
given historical tsunami some viable ark on
which to survive. What comes most readily
to mind in this regard is the situation in the
Western Roman Empire in the fifth century
A.D., where the complete ruin threatened by
the dissolution of the secular imperial order
under the pressure of barbarian invasions was
step by step averted through the unexpected
political efforts of wise and holy popes and
bishops whose real mission was nevertheless
dedicated to the creation of a supernatural
community.
No such solace can be found in the midst
of our contemporary catastrophe. Today,
literally every single social pillar has been
diverted from its proper function to grotesque
ends. All of them—Family, Labor, Capital,
Education, State, and Church—exalt naturalist Enlightenment mystiques demanding submission, as they always do, to the triumph of
the willful, passionate powers that dictatorially define what these mean. Each has been so
perverted that its chief function has become
that of drowning the individuals it was meant
to help clamber aboard its distinctive ark
to avoid the floodwaters of earthly misery.
All forces essential for the creation, preservation, and exaltation of the lives of human
persons are united as never before in assuring individual degradation and destruction,
with the current Pontiff serving as Supreme
Spokesman for “mystique-ism,” “witnessing”
and “accompanying” the reigning Oligarchs
30

The Angelus u September - October 2021

in their oppression of all men and women of
good will.
Good popes forced by historical circumstances in Late Antiquity to undertake certain tasks that were not intended to be part
of their mission were at least themselves also
servants of a living social institution and took
their responsibility to maintain the full Catholic Tradition seriously. It is now atomistic
individuals, stripped almost entirely of communal aid, who are in the unenviable position
of having to assume a much wider gamut of
responsibilities totally on their own.
What is an individual woman, thrown
back on her own devices, to do under such
alarming conditions? Under no circumstances is she to turn inward to consult “the feminine mystique.” She can spare herself the
effort because this, as usual, will be infallibly
defined and shoved down her throat by the
most aggressive ideologues and criminals in
union with the Global Oligarchy of our day
anyway. Her effort will only serve their cause.
Instead, she is to do what Catholic
women—just like Catholic men—have always
been obliged to do: aim her mind and spirit
outward and upward, to the correction and
transformation in Christ that alone will truly
fulfill and perfect her. To a large degree that
means simply holding firm to the Tradition,
for, as Archbishop Lefebvre said, “our future
lies in our past,” and it is our duty to pass on
what we have received from that Tradition
untrammeled. But to hand down that Tradition effectively under the dictatorship of the
ruling Oligarchy today will mean imitating
the activist example of the Mexican señoras,
religiosas, y jovenes at the time of the Cristeros,
if only to carry on the basic familial mission
of protecting one’s loved ones. Mistakes will
be made in the process—there is no doubt
about it. But, as Napoleon was wont to say,
when battle is forced upon us, on s’y engage et
puis on voit—one engages the enemy and sees
what happens. The unum necessarium is to look
to the supernatural message of the Cross and
not to the natural one of the willfully manipulated and sinful mystique. Christus vincit; Christus regnat; Christus imperat. Viva Cristo Rey!

SAINTS

St. Catherine
of Siena
Esto Vir
Michael Cassman

Virgin, Hermit, Mystic
aterina di Jacopo di Benincasa was
the twenty-second child born to
devout parents in the Republic of
Siena on March 25, 1347. Naturally speaking, Catherine had very little hope
of being anything greater than ordinary and
never learned to write.
Before most children are prepared to
examine their own conscience, Catherine
began experiencing visions of Christ and the
saints. By the age of seven, she had consecrated her virginity to Our Lord.
Catherine’s adolescent years were filled
with many tribulations. On account of her
striking beauty, her parents strongly pressured her to take a husband, but the young
saint was determined to live a consecrated life
as a third-order Dominican Sister of Penance.
Catherine went to great lengths to maintain

C

her promises to Our Lord and marred her
appearance by cutting her hair, fasting rigorously, and performing even more radical
mortifications. After years of struggle and
strife in her family, Catherine’s parents finally relented. Her mother personally petitioned
the “Mantalleta’’ Sisters of Penance to allow
her daughter to join. After a series of rejections and further insistence from her mother,
in 1366 at the age of 19, Catherine took the
holy vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience
within the third order Dominicans of the Sisters of Penance.

Wife, Mother, Apostle
As a third-order religious, Catherine
wore the habit of the Mantalleta Sisters but
remained at home. Her room was her cloister.
She barely ate, barely slept, rarely spoke, and
always prayed. Her extraordinary asceticism
31

SAINTS

was rewarded with extraordinary mysticism.
At the age of 21, she experienced what is
called a “Mystical Marriage” with Our Lord
Jesus Christ. Our Lord appeared to Catherine
together with the Blessed Virgin, saints Peter
and Paul, and King David, playing his harp.
Our Lord praised her abandonment of the
pleasures and vanities of the world, He bid
her make a promise that she kept faithfully
all her life: “I marry you to me in faith, your
Creator and Savior. Keep this faith unspotted
until you come to me in heaven and celebrate
the marriage that has no end.”
During this mystical marriage, Catherine described a ring that Our Lord gave her
that she wore on her right hand. Though she
could see it at all times it was kept invisible
to the rest of the world. Likewise, Catherine
was also permitted to share in the suffering of
her Bridegroom by receiving the mark of the
stigmata, at first visibly, and then hidden at her
request. Following what her spiritual director
called “the Marriage,” Our Lord introduced
Catherine’s new mission: to leave her cell and
grow in the love of God through the love of
neighbor, following His Providence wherever
He should lead.
Strengthened by a divine promise to support her in this new mission, Catherine left
her cell and began her public life. As the Black
Plague raged in Europe, she tended the sick
and buried the dead with her own hands. She
fed the hungry and clothed the naked. With
ardent zeal and supernatural wisdom, she
preached the wonders of God and recalled
many sinners to repentance. Bishops granted extraordinary faculties to traveling clergymen, allowing them to follow Catherine
as she preached so as to hear the multitude
of confessions she inspired from her listeners.
Catherine’s ministry soon drew a band of
devout followers; a family of holy penitents
who all called her “Mother,” “mammina.” She
was a true mother, loving, compassionate, and
fervent for their spiritual growth and eternal happiness. Her mission was confirmed
by miracles as well. She worked healings,
multiplied food to feed the hungry, expelled
demons, and prophesied.
The saint’s fame spread like wildfire, reaching both secular and ecclesiastical authori32

The Angelus u September - October 2021

ties. God gave her such wisdom that princes,
priests, bishops, and even the Holy Father
himself, on multiple occasions, sought her
counsel. Though unlearned and unable to
write, she dictated hundreds of letters advising Pontiffs and princes during one of the most
trying times in the Church’s history. Through
her many epistles, she provoked reform in
the Church, inspired a new Crusade, and to
a greater or lesser degree, brought an end to
the Avignon Papacy.
Though the years of her ministry were
marked with success, growth, and countless
conversions, there were great difficulties for
Catherine and many occasions for passive
mortification as she met hostility on numerous fronts. Jealous sisters and religious spread
horrific rumors attacking her virtue, attributing her miracles to the work of the devil, her
successful preaching to attractively-worded
heresy, and many who were unable to accept
her Divine mission criticized her conduct as
unbecoming of a woman, let alone a woman
of God.
In her thirty-third year, her physical
strength began to fail. Catherine was unable
to consume any food but the Holy Eucharist,
leaving her body emaciated to the point of
death. In January of 1380, her health saw a
sudden plunge that coincided with the people
of Rome rebelling against the Holy Father.
As her health rapidly declined, Catherine
was rendered unable to walk on her own. On
some days she could only move her hands
and feet, on others she could hardly speak.
She still survived on the Eucharist alone, her
only sustenance.
She suffered intensely for thirteen weeks,
and her spiritual director records that her
pains increased with each passing day. In her
final hours, she was strengthened by the Holy
Eucharist, the Sacrament of Penance, and
the Apostolic blessing from her priestly sons.
On the last day of April 1380, St. Catherine
departed this world to be eternally united to
her Bridegroom.

SAINTS

Frescoes by Alessandro
Franchi and Gaetano
Marinelli, 1896.
C
 atherine’s mother
sees her daughter
climbing the stairs
suspended in the air.
C
 atherine cutting off
her long hair.
C
 atherine’s father
finds her praying with
the Dove of the Holy
Spirit above her head.
C
 atherine gives her
cloak to Jesus in the
guise of a poor man.
 J esus offering
Catherine a crown of
gold and a crown of
thorns.

33

SAINTS

The Spiritual Doctrine of
St. Catherine of Siena
Duty of State
Despite her own marvelous gifts of mysticism, miracles, and ecstasies, Catherine never
lost track of what she calls the “ordinary way”
to sanctity. In her Dialogue, St. Catherine
explains that there is a bridge uniting Heaven and Earth. Growing in virtue by faithfully
performing one’s duty of state is the “ordinary
way” to pass from Earth to Heaven across the
bridge of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Rationality, Freedom,
Deified Humanity
“Open your eyes and look within me and
you will see the dignity and beauty of my
reasoning creature.” Thus God spoke to St.
Catherine as recorded in her Dialogue.
This is one of the greatest treasures of St.
Catherine’s spiritual legacy: our rationality is
the image and likeness of God in our souls. It is
our eternal soul, able to know and love, which
makes us like God.

St. Catherine Receiving the Stigmata.

Our Lord revealed to St. Catherine that
meditating on the infinite wisdom of God
reveals the true glory and beauty of the human
soul because our rationality is the very image
and likeness of God. By this means we find
ourselves in Him and Him in us.
But God not only made us rational, He
also made us free. St. Catherine in her writings asserts that the greatest gift God gave to
man was his free will.
Oh inestimable and sweetest fire of love,
how clearly you show forth, with this gift of
freedom, the excellence of your rational creature!

In a somewhat spectacular assertion, St.
Catherine applies a passage from the Gospel
of St. Matthew to God Himself at the moment
of our creation:
“Let it be done as you wish,” says Almighty
God to each one of us, “I am making you free,
so that you may be subject to nothing but me.”

Love of God to Love of Neighbor
Recognizing this inherent glory and beauty of the human soul reflecting the infinite

SAINTS

love and wisdom of God, we cannot help but
realize that we must love in others that which
is the object of God’s love in them. Seeing the
love of the Creator for all His rational creatures, the loving soul naturally spreads its
love for the Creator to its fellow creatures. St.
Catherine writes:

two-thousand-year history. Amid rampant
clerical immorality, corruption, and schism,
Catherine received a special revelation from
God that we should all take very much to
heart. . . In a word, that the sins of the clergy should not lessen our reverence for them.
God Told St. Catherine:

The love that the soul sees that God has
for her, she, in turn, extends to all other creatures. . . she immediately feels compelled to
love her neighbor as herself, for she sees how
supremely she herself is loved by God, beholding herself in the wellspring of the sea of the
Divine Essence.

The reverence you pay to [priests] is not
actually paid to them but to me, in virtue of
the Blood I have entrusted to their ministry. . .
And just as the reverence is done to me, so also
is the irreverence. . . You should hold [these
sinful ministers] out to me with tears and great
desire, so that I in my goodness may clothe
them with the garment of charity. . . Then I
will let myself be constrained by the longing,
tears, and prayers of my servants, and will be
merciful to my bride by reforming her with
good and holy shepherds.

It is this love that motivated St. Catherine
throughout her heroic apostolic ministry. She
saw clearly the beauty and worth of every
human soul and worked tirelessly to help
them on the way to salvation.

Weak, Fallen, but Unafraid
Despite this profound understanding of the
glory and beauty of the human soul, St. Catherine was in no way naive about our fallen
nature. During her time, (much like our own),
there was widespread disgrace, depravity, and
public scandal at every level of the Church.
However, rather than focusing on the tragedy of sin and the justice of righteous retribution, St. Catherine chose to focus on sin as
an opportunity for God to bring a soul closer
to Him. “I always pluck the roses from the
thorns,” the Lord told her, “endless are the
ways of my Providence to draw sinners out
of the guilt of mortal sin.” Everything is an
opportunity for grace.
Rather than focusing on the sickness of
the soul, St. Catherine focused on the remedy, the saving power of the Precious Blood of
our Lord Jesus Christ. She referred to Christ
as a God of seemingly “uncontrollable love”
made manifest in His Holy Incarnation. She
explains that the actions of our God are so
incredible, so beyond what our weak intellects would call “reasonable,” that to bring
them about He must be consumed by some
divine “madness” and “drunkenness” of love
for His creatures.
The supernatural perspective of this great
saint strengthened her and her followers
during one of the worst crises in the Church’s

Despite scandalous and sinful behavior
from even the highest ranks of the clergy,
we must never lose reverence or respect for
their office or the indelible mark upon their
unworthy souls. To paraphrase St. Catherine,
we must never abandon hope because of the
thorns, but ever rejoice because of the roses.

Discover St. Catherine
To truly love St. Catherine, we must learn
about her. Here are some helpful resources
to more deeply discover the life and legacy
of St. Catherine of Siena, “the saint of our
humanity.” May she intercede for us for the
grace to be taken with Divine Charity, who
has so liberally loved us!
Literature & Resources
Catherine of Siena. The Dialogue. Trans.
Suzanne Noffke. New York: Paulist Press,
1980.
Raymond of Capua, The Life of St. Catherine
of Siena. Charlotte, North Carolina: TAN
Books, 2011.
Noffke, Suzanne. Catherine of Siena: Vision
Through a Distant Eye. New York: Authors
Choice Press, 2006.
Scudder, Vita. Letters of Catherine Be­nincasa.
Whitefish, Montana: Kessinger Publishing, 2017.
Undset, Sigrid. Catherine of Siena. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2009.
35

Rest of the Story
For nearly two thousand years the Catholic Mass was said in the same manner everywhere in the western world, regardless of nation or nationality. But in the 20th century
that ceased to be true. Profound changes that had begun far earlier culminated in the
Second Vatican Council and the creation of a new theology, the effect of which was a
new form of worship. Up until this point in history, few laymen had ever heard the story
of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Fewer still knew that he was a missionary in the fields of
Africa, Bishop of Dakar, Apostolic Delegate to West Africa, or even that he was appointed as the head of the international priestly order of the Holy Ghost Fathers. How
he became known as a conservative leader and a voice for all those looking to oppose
modernism was known by fewer still.
This is that story.

The Rest of the Story is an essential book for the Catholic readers of today as it provides a brief historical and liturgical-political backdrop for some of the most pivotal events
of the 20th century—the effects of which we, as Catholics, are still experiencing today.
While those who have read the near-700-page biography by the same author will not find
anything new in this book, they will find the topics covered here much more accessible in
this shortened format.
If you’re looking to learn more about Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who he was, why he
took action and the enormous effect his actions have had—this is the book you need to
read.
273 pp. Softcover. STK# 8788. $19.95

Apologia for Tradition
Cherish Catholic Tradition and its essential role in Christ’s indefectible Church through
the ages!

Apologia for Tradition is a powerful, well-documented defense of sacred Tradition as a
solution for the modern crisis in the Church. This book demonstrates how the Catholics
of history and today are united in a timeless battle to defend Tradition. A battle that stretches from the sands of the Colosseum to the cultural arena of today’s post-Christian era.
The book shows:
•
•
•
•

The triumph of Tradition over persecution and heresy
Historical examples of the Church’s method of adherence to Tradition
How in every era, Christ raised up saints to defend the Tradition of Holy Mother Church
How evil has attempted to eradicate Tradition, especially today

In the unhappy event of a conflict between the “living Magisterium” and Tradition, the primacy can be attributed to Tradition alone, for one simple reason: Tradition, which is the “living” Magisterium considered in its universality and continuity,
is infallible in itself, whereas the so-called “living” Magisterium, understood as the
current preaching of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, is infallible only under certain
conditions.—Roberto de Mattei
136 pp. Softcover. STK# 8745. 6” x 9”

www.angeluspress.org | 1-800-966-7337

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

COMMENTARY

Women’s
Ordination
Michael Warren Davis

E

ven when I was a boy, growing up in
the Episcopal Church, my favorite
part of our Sunday service was the
Lord’s Supper. Our parish thought it
was definitely on the “high” end of the liturgical spectrum, complete with acolytes and
altar rails. Our vicar was a very kind, intelligent young lady named Ruth. She had two
children, and her husband was the bishop’s
chauffeur. Every Sunday, she would celebrate
what Catholics call a Sung Mass, complete
with acolytes and altar rails.
Ours was the last rural parish in the Diocese of Massachusetts, so our service was a
little “hillbilly deluxe.” It paled in comparison to the Church of the Advent: the grand
Anglo-Catholic church on Beacon Hill in Boston. Still, our liturgy was miles higher than
the local Catholic church.
Anyway, near the end of the service, we
would all genuflect and then quietly process
to the front. Then we’d kneel at the rail. Finally, Ruth would come by with the bread and
say, “The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ keep
you in everlasting life.” We’d say Amen, eat
the bread, and then shuffle back to our pew.
Yes, I loved it—though didn’t know what

exactly it was that I loved. Like most Protestants, I believed in the Real Presence; and,
like most Protestants, I couldn’t begin to tell
you what that meant. It seemed to me that
Queen Elizabeth I got it right:
’Twas God the word that spake it,
He took the bread and brake it,
And what the word did make it,
That I believe and take it.

Which is to say, “Beats me.”
Nevertheless, the Communion service
always made me feel close to the Lord. I
imagined myself like the Apostles at the Last
Supper, eating and drinking with Jesus: their
master, their teacher, their God, their friend.
I felt privileged to be joining with my fellow
disciples in worship. I felt real sorrow for my
sins—the sins that fixed Him to the Cross.
More than that, however, I felt a tremendous sense of relief. Christ had won the battle. He triumphed over death. I’d fought with
the Enemy, and yet not only did He pardon
me, but He offered to share His victory. What
more could I ask for?
Then, when I was about fifteen, something
very strange happened. It was an ordinary
37

COMMENTARY

service on an ordinary Sunday. Towards the
end, we all genuflected and then quietly processed to the front. We knelt at the rail. Finally, Ruth came by with the bread and said,
“The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ keep you
in everlasting life.” I said Amen, ate the bread,
then shuffled back to my pew.
As I knelt down to pray, I was startled by
this horrible feeling growing in my stomach. It was equal parts hunger and despair,
as though all the food in the world had been
eaten up and none would ever grow again.
I don’t know how else to describe it, except
that my soul felt like a desert. I’ve never felt
so empty or so lonely as I did that day.
My father noticed at once that something
was wrong. On the drive home, my father
kept glancing over at me. Finally, he asked,
“Are you okay?”
Suddenly, I burst into tears. I cried so hard
that he pulled off the road. To be honest, I
had no idea what was wrong myself. Then
a thought appeared in my mind, as though
someone had flipped a switch and turned on
all the lights. Through my tears I said, “I want
to be Catholic.”
***
Well, I didn’t. It’s hard to believe looking
back, but I didn’t.
I’d been attending Catholic schools since
fifth grade, and until that moment I hadn’t the
faintest desire to join the Church.
Well, that’s not quite true. I asked my parents to convert once, when I was about eleven,
because I hated being the only kid who didn’t
go up for Communion during school Masses.
Then I learned that I could follow my classmates up to the sanctuary, cross my arms and
receive a blessing. I was totally inconspicuous.
My interest in becoming a Catholic disap-

38

The Angelus u September - October 2021

peared at once.
Like I said, the liturgy at my little parish
church was much better than that of the local
Catholic church. And, once I could drive,
I’d go into Boston to worship at the Advent.
To those who have never witnessed really
good Anglo-Catholic liturgy, I can’t begin
to describe its beauty. For those who have, I
needn’t try.
To quote G.K. Chesterton, my fellow former Anglican: “I can speak, I think, for many
other converts when I say that the only thing
that can produce any sort of nostalgia or
romantic regret, any shadow of homesickness in one who has in truth come home, is
the rhythm of Cranmer’s prose.” He certainly
speaks for me.
My high school was also a bastion of Modernism. That’s a word I never use lightly,
but here it’s quite accurate. Most of our religion teachers told us that the Church would
“evolve” in its views on homosexuality. I distinctly remember one of them saying, in an
offhand sort of way, that the Church would
also “grow out” of the papacy. (What she
would grow into, she didn’t say.)
And, of course, not a single member of
the faculty would defend the all-male celibate priesthood. It was taken for granted
that women would be ordained within ten or
twenty years. Hopefully the Church wouldn’t
“grow out” of the papacy before then, so one
of these new priestesses can ascend St. Peter’s
throne before we stow it away with Torquemada’s thumbscrews and Tetzel’s ledger.
In other words, I was led to believe that
the Catholic Church would become exactly
like the Episcopal Church, except with bad
hymns. Of course, I was quite wrong. An ugly
Mass can still be valid; an Anglican Mass, no

COMMENTARY

matter how beautiful, cannot. But that didn’t
occur to my teenage self, and so my desire to
become Catholic simply withered on the vine.
***
Now, fast-forward about eight years. It’s
2015 or thereabouts. I recently finished college and have embarked on a career in journalism, with a strong focus on religion. I have
a special hatred for Anglicanorum coetibus, Pope
Benedict XVI’s apostolic constitution establishing the Anglican Ordinariates.
The Ordinariates are a confederation of
Catholic parishes that celebrate the Mass in
a rite heavily influenced by the Book of Common Prayer. They allow Anglicans to keep the
best of our liturgical tradition—the “Anglican
patrimony,” they call it—within the Catholic
Church. Naturally, most orthodox Anglicans
are taking Benedict up on his offer.
I think it’s a travesty. It doesn’t matter how
liberal the Anglican Communion becomes, I
say. The Church of England is still our mother-church. How can we abandon her now
when she needs us most? Where was our
sense of duty, of loyalty? What of our faith
that Christ would not allow the Gates of Hell
to prevail against His Church?
(Of course, I was wrong to put my faith
in the Anglican Communion. But I hope the
faithful of the Society of St. Pius X will appreciate the position I found myself in. I was the
last traditionalist Anglican!)
Anyway, by now, I’ve a bit of a name for
myself. Earlier this year—that is, 2015—I was
asked to write a tract called Mere Anglicanism
on the same theme. Then my friend Ryan says
to me, “If you’re going to write a whole book
attacking the Ordinariate, you should at least
go see it first.” Why not?
There’s an Ordinariate parish in Boston,

comprised mostly of former members of the
Church of the Advent. They meet in the basement chapel of a diocesan parish: a plain, windowless room with a plain table-altar. Ryan
hasn’t come along, so I didn’t know anyone.
I sit in the back pew, alone.
The Mass is uneventful. It reminds me of
the Advent, though not nearly so grand. The
priest is a kind-looking older man in a moustache who preaches like a Southern Baptist.
He has what we Anglicans call “enthusiasm,”
and we don’t approve of enthusiasm.
Then it comes time for Communion. Just
like in my school days, I stay inconspicuous
by following all the Catholics up to the altar
with my arms crossed. To my surprise, these
Catholics kneel! I thought this was part of the
“Anglican patrimony.” Growing up around
Novus Ordo parishes, I’d only seen altar rails
in Episcopal churches. (A few weeks later,
when I attended a Latin Mass, I realized
that, yes, Catholics have been known to kneel
before the altar from time to time.)
So, here I am, kneeling in the basement of
this ugly church, surrounded by traitors and
cowards. I kick myself for wasting this Sunday with papists when the Advent is just a
few minutes down the road. I make a mental
note to call Ryan and chew him out when I
get back to my car.
I’m the last one in line, right on the lefthand side of the altar. Now, the priest—beginning from the right—begins to make his way
down the rail. I hear him say to each communicant, “The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ,
which was given for thee, preserve thy body
and soul unto everlasting life.” Amen.
Suddenly, something stirs in me. I’ve never
known how to describe it, except that it was
like waiting at the airport for a loved one—

39

COMMENTARY

how you know they’re coming through the
gate, even when you can’t see them. You just
know, deep down in your bones, that they’re
near at hand.
As the priest goes down the line, the feeling gets stronger and stronger. The Loved
One gets closer and closer. I can hear my
heart pounding in my ears. Then it dawns on
me: there, in that little bowl the man in the
moustache is holding, that is Jesus Christ. It
is actually Jesus Christ. Jesus isn’t “here,” as
some sort of pious ambience. He’s there, in the
priest’s hands. He’s there, in the mouths of the
communicants.
Then the priest paused over me and said,
“I bless you in the name of the Father…”
As I made my way back to the pew, I felt
the same hunger I’d felt eight years before,
only there was no despair. On the contrary.
I felt like a castaway who’d stumbled into a
great feast.
No, that doesn’t do it justice. It was like I’d
spent my whole life eating a thin, slimy gruel,
and someone had just put a ribeye steak under
my nose.
No, that’s still not right. It was as if I’d been
hungry my whole life, but hadn’t known there
was such a thing as food. I didn’t know the
desire could be satisfied. Now I knew better.
After Mass, this kindly priest comes up to
me and shakes my hand. “I don’t think I’ve
seen you here before,” he says, smiling gently. “Welcome. What’s your name?” Once
again, tears run down my cheeks. “I want to
be Catholic.”
***
Dear reader, please forgive all of the autobiography in this article. If I’m ever fortunate enough to meet you, I’ll gladly prattle
on about myself for hours quite happily; but

40

The Angelus u September - October 2021

I promise that, in writing, I’ve more or less
disciplined myself to abstain from first-person pronouns.
This is actually the one part of my life I
don’t like to talk about. I find it embarrassing.
It’s the best joke I’ll ever tell, and I’m just the
punchline. I feel like Sarah, the wife of Abraham: “God hath made me to laugh, so that all
that hear will laugh with me.”
But more than that, I want to make a point
about the theme of this issue, “The Church
and Women.” And that point is this: our
priestess Ruth was a kind, intelligent woman
with a true devotion to Jesus. I might even
go so far as to call her pastoral. But she wasn’t
really a priest. She couldn’t act in persona
Christi. She couldn’t celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. She couldn’t feed her flock
with the Body and Blood of Our Blessed Lord.
I think it’s easy for our progressive friends
to lose sight of this very important (yet very
simple) point: when it comes to the question
of (say) whether women should be ordained or
not, it doesn’t actually matter what we think.
It matters what God thinks. And, according
to God, if you try to ordain a woman, nothing
will happen. It won’t “take.”
Of course, those progressives have heard
that argument before. The problem isn’t in
their heads. It’s in their hearts. Virtually every
error in Church history has arisen, not from
a lack of intelligence, but from a lack of gratitude. We insist that everything make sense
to us, that everything fit neatly into our own
paltry little worldview. It’s an aversion to mystery. It’s a refusal to be awed and delighted,
humbled and afraid, chastened and comforted. That’s why Christ told us to become like
children.
So, you’ll notice that all of those who feel

COMMENTARY

that women are entitled to receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders also feel that pro-choice
Catholic politicians are entitled to receive the
Sacrament of the Eucharist. Some of them
might be won over (eventually) by theological
arguments. But for most of them the problem
runs much deeper. They want Christ, but they
want Him on their terms. They feel entitled to
their own Christ, who agrees with their own
progressive sensibilities.
That isn’t how the Church sees it. The
Church reminds us, in her loving, gentle way,
that we’re like the Canaanite woman. We’re
dogs who are fortunate to eat even the crumbs
that fall from their master’s table. And yet the
Master feeds us His own body and blood!
If your response is, “And that’s very nice of
Him, but why would He only hire men to serve
at the table?”—well, you may want to reassess
your priorities.
In a 2014 interview, Seán Cardinal O’Malley touched on the subject of women’s ordination and made a very important point. “If
I were founding a church,” he once told an
interviewer, “I’d love to have women priests.
But Christ founded it, and what He has given
us is something different.”
I expect that quote will raise a few eyebrows. But notice something: you will never in
a thousand years hear progressives make that
argument for their own camp. You will never
hear a Modernist say, “If I were founding a
church, I’d love to have an all-male priesthood. But Christ founded it, and what He has
given us is something different.”
Advocates for women’s ordination never
even pretend as though they’re simply humbling themselves to Christ’s will. And that’s
also true of advocates for admitting prochoice politicians to Holy Communion. And

of advocates for same-sex “marriage.” And of
advocates for contraception. And on and on,
down the list of new-fangled errors.
This is why, fundamentally, the battle
between orthodoxy and heresy isn’t waged
for our minds, but for our hearts. Error stems
not from stupidity, but from pride.
It’s also why heretics always tend overwhelmingly to be trained in theology. As a
matter of fact, in his book on the Arian crisis
of the 4th century, St. John Henry Newman
said:
Perhaps it was permitted, in order to impress
upon the Church at that very time passing out
of her state of persecution to her long temporal
ascendancy, the great evangelical lesson, that,
not the wise and powerful, but the obscure,
the unlearned, and the weak constitute her
real strength.

The obscure and the unlearned don’t put
their own theories and ideologies before
Christ and His Church—if only because they
don’t have theories or ideologies. Those are
vices for the intelligentsia. So it is that the
smartest men in the world come up with the
worst possible ideas.
Of course, there’s no greater exemplar of
Christian humility than Our Blessed Mother:
the only mortal since Eve whose reason wasn’t
stained by original sin. And yet Mary wasn’t
made an Apostle. She didn’t leave us with a
single epistle. She didn’t preach. All we have
from her is a prayer—a prayer of gratitude, no
less. “The Almighty has done great things for
me,” she sang, “and holy is His Name.”
That was enough for Our Lady. May it be
enough for all of us.

41

ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE

Sermon t
April 10th, 1983

T

oday, on this Quasimodo Sunday,
Providence has reunited almost
all the religious of the Society
of Saint Pius X. The occasion of
this important reunion, which will certainly be recorded in the annals of the
Society’s history, gives me the opportunity to be more specific about what distinguishes the sisters of Saint Pius X. And
since, in everything, the end must be considered, we will therefore firstly ask what
the aim of the sisters of the Society Saint
Pius X is.
The general aim is, without a doubt,
that of all religious congregations: to
save one’s soul, render glory to God, and
prepare oneself to participate in God’s
glory for eternity—and for this, to choose
undoubtedly the surest, and the most
sublime and beautiful way, the one to
which Our Lord Jesus Christ calls the
souls whom He chooses. This is the principal aim of every soul who consecrates
itself to God, who gives itself completely
to God.
And what is the aim of the Sisters’ Society? It is to collaborate with the priests of
the Society of Saint Pius X in their apostolic work. This the sisters can do in three
ways:
In a material way, by taking upon
themselves duties which relieve and facilitate the priests’ tasks in the apostolate.
In a pastoral way, by helping priests in
their sacerdotal ministry: whether it be

ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE

o the SSPX Sisters
— St. Michael en Brenne, France
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

teaching catechism, assisting in the work of
retreats, or also, for example, visiting the sick,
taking care of primary schools, and working
with girls. The Sisters can thus pastorally help
the Fathers in their ministry.
They can likewise help them spiritually
by their prayers and sacrifices. And I think
that this is one of the reasons why the sisters
have an additional hour of adoration in front
of the Blessed Sacrament every day. There
they entrust to Our Lord all the intentions
of the priory, of the works in which they are
employed, to which they devote themselves,
so that God may bless these works and sanctify those who are devoted to them: firstly,
the priests, the religious themselves, and then
all the people who devote themselves to the
apostolic and missionary work of the Society’s
priories, schools, and works.
This, then, is the end for which the Congregation was founded.
And what are the bonds between the
Society of the priests and that of the sisters?
Well, these bonds are firstly bonds of origin.
Indeed, in the statutes that I had the occasion
to draw up as founder of the Priestly Society,
Providence permitted that an allusion to the
religious was made. And thanks be to God,
this was helpful when my opponents had the
opportunity to criticize me for the foundations of the sisters and the brothers. I said,
“Excuse me, but in the statutes which have
been approved by Rome, approved by Cardinal Wright and the Congregation of the Clergy, allusions were made to the foundation of

the sisters and the brothers.” Consequently, I
would say that the sisters’ Society has already
been implicitly recognized by Rome, simultaneously with the priestly Society. Without a
doubt, the approbation has not yet officially
been given for the Society independently of
the priestly one, but we can hope that with
time, God will give this official approbation
to the Congregation of the religious. There
is consequently a profound bond of origin,
willed by Providence, between the priestly
Society and the sisters’ Society.
There is also a particular bond, I would
say, of doctrine and spirituality. And this, in
my opinion, is very important. If the priestly Society has at the heart of its spirituality
the priesthood and the Holy Sacrifice of the
Mass—and this also providentially, because of
the circumstances in which we find ourselves,
since it is precisely the Holy Sacrifice of the
Mass which has been the object of degradation, alterations, and changes which have
disfigured it… It thus seemed to me that it
was God’s Will for priests to be conscious of
the importance of their priesthood, conscious
that to offer the Sacrifice is the reason for the
priesthood. The priests of the Society therefore devote themselves in a profound way to
the study of the grandeur and sublimity of the
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and to find therein
the whole mystery, Mysterium Fidei, the Mystery of our Faith, the central Mystery of our
Faith from which everything flows.
I think, therefore, that the sisters’ spirituality is likewise to rediscover what the heart of
43

ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE

Therefore, let us practice this
common work in charity, by
both clearly specifying and
distinguishing tasks; then
charity can be practiced, and
its fruit will be magnificent.
We have seen splendid fruits
of this collaboration of priests
and religious in the missions,
extraordinary apostolic fruit, alas,
practically ruined today by the
lack of vocations, by the lack of
supernatural spirit, by the lack of
the spirit of faith.

44

The Angelus u September - October 2021

the Church is, what its treasure is, the
treasure which Our Lord Jesus Christ
gave to His Apostles on Holy Thursday.
In instituting the priesthood, He was
giving them His body, blood, soul, and
divinity, all the graces which flow from
His Sacrifice. We must find this treasure again. We must love it. We must
seek all our graces in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and in the Eucharistic
presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ. I
think that this is very important. It is a
profound bond which unites the priests
and the Sisters’ Society.
Thus, bond of origin, bond of spirituality, and bond of apostolate. This
being said, the sisters’ Society is an
independent society. The day when
relations become normal between the
SSPX as well as the sisters’ Society and
Rome, it is obvious that your Society
will be canonically independent.
However, I insist on the fact that
the moral bonds (about which I have
just spoken to you) are important, and
I would even say essential, to the point
that, if these bonds were broken, I do
not think the sisters’ Society could subsist any longer. If the religious deny
their origin, if they deny their spirituality and doctrine, if they deny their apostolate, what will remain of them? What
will remain of their Society? Consequently, if your Society is juridically
independent, morally, before God, in
the grace of God, in the grace of the
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the sisters’
Society must remain profoundly united to the priestly Society, especially
in the present circumstances when the
Church’s doctrine is being attacked on
every side, and in a certain sense, its
spirituality disintegrated.
And we can raise the question: “Will
not these ties between the priestly Society and the sisters cause difficulties?”
Oh, my dear Sisters, the Church has
experienced these obstacles throughout its whole history. There are always

ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE

trials, misunderstandings, misconceptions;
these are part of poor human nature. And of
course, we saw this, for example, in the missions, where all the religious of the dioceses
(God knows how many religious congregations were working in collaboration with the
missionaries) such as the sisters of Cluny, the
sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Castre,
who were helping us a lot in the missions...
There were undoubtedly difficulties sometimes, but precisely we were forced to clearly
define their respective work and connection.
So doing, we made sure that the different
religious congregations, missionary and religious, be both sufficiently independent and
collaborate in the common goal in the spirit
of the Church.
So even if these difficulties exist, they
must not be a reason for breaking away! This
would be ridiculous! If such were the case,
we could then say that if there are difficulties
in a marriage, it must be broken up. It is not
because a couple must make sacrifices that
they must immediately think of a separation.
It is not because there are difficulties in societies, and even in communities, that we must
break them up, that we must break up what
God Himself has established.
Therefore, let us practice this common
work in charity, by both clearly specifying
and distinguishing tasks; then charity can be
practiced, and its fruit will be magnificent.
We have seen splendid fruits of this collaboration of priests and religious in the missions,
extraordinary apostolic fruit, alas, practically
ruined today by the lack of vocations, by the
lack of supernatural spirit, by the lack of the
spirit of faith.
You may be asking yourselves: “Is our
Society a contemplative or an active one?” I
will answer that canonically, your Society is
not a contemplative society. A contemplative
society must have a strict cloister, like that
of the Dominicans of the Great Order, the
Benedictines, the Poor Clares, or the Carmelites. No one can enter inside the community.
And they also generally have the obligation
to recite the whole Divine Office. They get up
early to sing Matins, Lauds. This is what char-

acterizes the contemplative congregations.
So, how does the Church consider your congregation? I would say that, having an active
apostolate, you are an active congregation.
Those among you who are already working
in the different priories, well know how the
priests are overwhelmed by their activities,
requests from everywhere, work, the necessity of going out to administer a sacrament
here, to teach catechism elsewhere, to say a
Mass far away. The priests need your prayer.
And I thank God that you have this hour of
prayer in your constitutions. I am sure that
this is what upholds you in this spirit of faith,
piety, recollection, and silence which you
have, which you manifest, and which is very
important. This is very important for your
own life, for your active life. Do not let yourselves be dissipated, carried away by noise
and a febrile activity, but be united to God.
This is what makes the grandeur of your religious life: union with Our Lord Jesus Christ,
life with Him.
Congratulations to you all! Continue as
you have done until now. Grow in the love of
Our Lord, in the love of souls, in the love of
sacrifice, in the love of the Cross of Our Lord
Jesus Christ. And draw this love from the
heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Our Lady
of Compassion, Our Lady of Sorrows. Ask her
to pour all her sentiments for her Divine Son
into your hearts so that you may live them.

45

APOLOGETICS

The Relation
of the Sexes
Pauper Peregrinus

E

very truth, even to the most humdrum, has two contrary errors. If
there is only one bottle of milk in the
refrigerator, then the hard-headed
skeptic who insists there is not a drop of milk
in the house, and the dreamer who imagines
the refrigerator to be an almost limitless reservoir of milk, are both wrong. When it comes
to grasping some more important, and therefore more difficult truth, it often helps to contrast it with its two opposed errors. An example of this is the relation between the sexes.
One of these two errors, contrary to the
word of God, is characteristic of much ancient
paganism, and also of Islam. This error sees a
woman as a mere accessory of a man, of much
less value than him, born only to marry and
have children, and hardly a rational being.
Wherever the gospel is not preached, societies
of fallen human beings seem to tend inevitably to degenerate in some such a direction.
The contrary error lies in supposing that
there are no distinctions between men and
women apart from the obvious physical ones.
This position has been characteristic of secular thought in the last century or so, influenced by Christianity but also exaggerating
one aspect of it. (I shall not consider the inco-

herent, ultra-modern position that tries to
combine this opinion with the claim that a
person may freely choose to “identify” either
as a man or woman.) We may ask people who
hold this position whether they do so on the
basis of evidence, and hence as something
they would be willing to revise, or as a dogma,
and if so, on the basis of what authority. I
think they would be hard-pressed to answer.
What, then, is the Christian teaching to
which these two errors are opposed? In the
first place, Scripture sets before us the great
dignity of each sex. Both man and woman
are made “in the image of God” (Gen. 1:27).
Both are called to give their free assent to
the gospel, and if they do so, they become
“co-heirs of the grace of life” (1 Pet. 3:7). The
17th-century English Puritan poet John Milton was woefully wide of the mark when he
wrote, in his description of our first parents in
Eden, Hee for God only, shee for God in him, if he
meant by this that Eve would not have had a
direct, personal relationship with her Creator
before the Fall. The grace of Christ restores
us to God’s friendship, lost through original
sin, and so each sex is called to a life of holiness, by the practice of the same theological
and moral virtues. Hence, St. Paul writing of
47

APOLOGETICS

the effects of baptism would say: “There is
neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond
nor free: there is neither male nor female. For
you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28).
This common vocation is expressed well in
the Roman canon: asking that we may receive
“some portion and society” with the saints,
the priest then names eight men and seven
women whom we hope to meet one day in
heaven.
This teaching, though it has to do with our
supernatural destiny, could not fail to leave its
mark on Christian civilization in this world,
humanizing the relations between the sexes.
We can think here of the friendship and
esteem of St. Paul for his female assistants,
or of St. John Chrysostom for St. Olympias,
something for which we will not find an analogy in the pagan world, and hardly in the
ancient Jewish one. Yet the modern world,
as Chesterton said more than a century ago,
is full of Christian virtues gone mad. If the
faith passes away from a civilization, but a
confused memory of the equal dignity of the
sexes remains, people will no longer locate
that equality on the supernatural level, as the
shared vocation to sanctity, but will begin to
insist instead on an absolute natural equality.
Then they will say that there is to be no more
question of a husband’s authority in regard to
his wife, and that any tendency for men to be
more prominent in public life than women,
and for women to be more often centered on
the life of the home, must result from prejudice and unjust discrimination, and must be
stamped out by the State. This way of thinking has led people to claim that the Catholic
priesthood must be opened to women as to
men.
We need therefore to be aware of the other
side of Christian teaching, and those passages
in Scripture that speak to us of the difference
between the sexes. There is an abiding significance, St. Paul tells us, in the fact that Eve was
created from Adam, not the other way round,
and to be his helper (1 Cor. 11:8-9). One of
the consequences of this is that if a woman
chooses to marry, she places herself under her
husband’s authority, as both St. Peter and St.
Paul teach (1 Pet. 3:1; Eph. 5:22-23), following the example of our Lord ( Jn. 4:16). In a
48

The Angelus u September - October 2021

mysterious phrase, the apostle of the gentiles
tells us that “the man … is the image and
glory of God; but the woman is the glory of
the man” (1 Cor. 11:7). What does this mean?
For a married woman, her husband’s manly
dignity is manifested most of all by his having so excellent a being as a woman under his
authority: this is his “glory.” And the woman
who chooses not to marry is also to be the
glory of a Man: of the man Christ Jesus. Of
course, both men and women alike are subject to Him; but we may perhaps gather from
St. Paul’s words that if women enter onto the
supernatural plane at all, they tend to make
progress there more rapidly than men, since
the movement of the spiritual life corresponds
better to the inclination of their own nature.
We may see this as a new application of the
words of the gospel: “The first shall be last,
and the last, first.”
The word of God also instructs us that the
difference between the sexes is to be manifested in the liturgy of the Church. “I suffer not
a woman to teach, nor to use authority over
the man,” writes St. Paul (1 Tim. 2:12). This
does not refer to teaching in schools or universities. Nor even is the apostle forbidding a
woman to become the CEO of a corporation
if circumstances should so suggest. It means
that the office of preaching, and the power,
that is, the sacrament, of orders are reserved
by divine law to the male sex. Why is this?
The simplest and best answer to this is
that it is the will of Christ. In instituting the
sacraments, He was divinely free. He could,
had He willed, have ordained that extreme
unction might be received not only by a person dangerously sick, but also by a friend on
the sick man’s behalf: but He did not so will.
And He could have chosen that both men and
women might receive the sacrament of orders:
but this was not His good pleasure.
Yet provided we accept His decision obediently, we are not forbidden to speculate
in faith about the motives of it. St. Paul tells
us that one such motive was the sin of Eve
(1 Tim. 2:14). The Lord wills that this act of
renunciation on the part of women be, as it
were, a way for the sex to expiate the sin of
their first member. For his part, St. Thomas
Aquinas reminds us that the sacraments were

APOLOGETICS

instituted as signs, as well as causes, of grace.
Just as only a sick man can symbolize the
spiritual infirmity to be removed by extreme
unction, so a man has by nature a certain aptitude that a woman lacks, writes the angelic
doctor, to symbolize the authority to be conferred by holy orders.
We can suggest also reasons from the work
itself of the priestly ministry. A priest has to be
ready to go alone into any environment, however dangerous. He will also listen, in confession, to the secrets of the heart, which may
include things that are shameful or obscene.
We should not be surprised if our Lord wished
to shield women from such experiences, and

to put their sensibility to other uses.
Finally, how we can speak of this subject
without mentioning the Woman par excellence? The liturgy says to the Blessed Virgin: “Thou has destroyed all the heresies in
the whole world.” This is true here as well.
At the Annunciation, she destroyed the old
pagan heresy, which saw woman as of little
worth, when, without consulting even with St.
Joseph, she welcomed God in the name of the
whole race. But simultaneously she destroyed
the future feminist heresy, by the very words
she used: “Behold the handmaid of the Lord,
be it done to me according to thy word.”

The Catholic Family series by Fr. Troadec
VOLUME I—A Brief Guide for a United, Lasting and Fruitful Marriage

STK# 8747. $12.95

VOLUME II—The Education of Children: How to Raise Happy,

Holy Children in a Profoundly Catholic Home
STK# 8787. $12.95

VOLUME III—The Family: Creating a Happy, Holy, and Strong Family Bond
Now more than ever the core of the Catholic family is under attack.
We must do all that we can to remove the destructive influence of
the world from our homes while striving to instill joy in each member
of the family, working together with love in Christ through the Faith.
Topics explored and explained in Book III:
• The Holy Family, A Model to Imitate, God’s Place in the Family
• Life of Prayer and Sacramental Life, The Eucharist, The Soul of Family Life
• The Influence of the Eucharist on Persons, The Effects of the Eucharist on the Family
• The Eucharist, A Tie with Our Deceased Loved Ones, The Eucharist and Vocations
• Must We Prefer Poverty to Wealth? The Condition of Poverty, The Condition of
Wealth
• The Audiovisual Universe, The Harmful Effects of the Audiovisual Universe
• The Internet and Its Dangers, The Harmful Effects of the Internet
• A Pure Life, A Historical Overview of the Current Decadence
• Fashion and Modesty, Masculine and Feminine Clothing, Wearing a Veil in Church
• Introduction to the Laws of Life, The Ramparts of Chastity, Weapons of Chastity,
Mortification
• The Catholic Family: A Climate of Charity, Living Together
• Strengthening Family Unity, Focusing on What Unites, Developing a Joyful Atmosphere, Charitable Words
STK# 8795. $12.95
VOLUME III IS NOW AVAILABLE!

www.angeluspress.org | 1-800-966-7337

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

49

LITURGY

The
Consecration
Fr. Christopher Danel

In this article we examine the moment of the Consecration in the Mass, presenting the work of Msgr. Nicholas
Gihr in his fundamental liturgical commentary The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: Dogmatically, Liturgically, and Ascetically Explained. Msgr. Gihr was a priest of Freiburg in Breisgau whose work of liturgical research took place during the
time frame spanning the pontificates of Popes Pius IX to Pius XI, including that of Pope Saint 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.)

Pinnacle of the Holy Mass
he moment of Consecration is the
moment which is the most important and solemn, the most sublime
and touching, the most holy and
fruitful of the whole sacrificial celebration;
for it includes that glorious and unfathomably
profound work, namely, the accomplishment
of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, in which all the
marvels of God’s love are concentrated. The
change of the bread and wine into Christ’s
Body and Blood can proceed from Him only
who “alone effects what is wonderful”: it is an
act of creative omnipotence. But to this act
of divine almighty power there is required a
human act, human cooperation and that on
the part of an ordained priest.
At his ordination the priest received the
supernatural power so to pronounce the
words: “This is My Body,” “This is My Blood,”

T

50

The Angelus u September - October 2021

such that they change the elements of bread
and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ.
At the Last Supper, Christ was the sole priest
offering sacrifice; at the altar He is the principal Sacrificer. Whilst in the Cenacle He
offered Himself without the assistance of
others, He now offers Himself on the altar
by the hands and mouth of the visible priest.
The priest is His organ and minister. This
truth clearly manifests the way and manner
in which the priest performs the act of Consecration; all he does indicates plainly that
he speaks and acts in the person of Christ
in accomplishing the Eucharistic Sacrifice.
That this may be manifest, he is directed by
the Church to imitate as faithfully as possible by word and deed Christ’s model act of
Consecration.
The Church’s liturgical act of Consecration
is nothing else than the repetition and copy

LITURGY

of the first celebration of the Lord’s Supper
in the Cenaculum at Jerusalem. The priest
narrates the first offering and institution of
the unbloody Sacrifice by Jesus Christ, and
while relating this, he performs the corresponding actions, that is, he imitates, as far
as possible, the Lord and does the same as
Christ did. He pronounces the effective words
of Consecration in the person of Christ (quasi
ex persona ipsius Christi loquentis, St. Thomas
Aquinas). He pronounces them over the bread
and wine with the intention of changing the
gifts at present lying on the altar and thereby
to offer up in sacrifice the Body and Blood of
Christ. Plain and simple are the words of the
liturgical text, as is best suited for a thing that
is both ineffably sublime and divine.

The Consecration of the Host
Who, the day before He suffered, took bread
into His holy and venerable hands, and with eyes
lifted up toward heaven, unto Thee, O God, His
Almighty Father, giving thanks to Thee, did bless,
break and give unto His disciples, saying: Take and
eat ye all of this: For this is My Body.
Qui pridie quam pateretur (the day before He
suffered). The Lord chose the eve of His bitter passion and death, the night on which He
was betrayed, to give us by the institution of
the Eucharist the most wonderful proof of His
love. With desire He had longed for this hour.
Before shedding His blood in torrents on the
painful way of the Cross, He would pour out
for us creatures the abundance of His grace,
all the treasures of His love in the Sacrament
of the Altar, that we might never forget what
He has done and suffered for us.
Accepit panem in sanctas ac venerabiles manus
suas (He took bread into His holy and venerable hands). Saying these words, the priest
also takes the Host into his hands. Holy and
sanctifying, venerable and adorable beyond
all expression are the hands of Christ. How
often has He raised them in prayer to His
Father, and extended them over men to bless
them! How these hands were transpierced
on the Cross with the most intolerable heat
of pain! How are the hands of a priest of the
Lord constituted? With holy oil were those

hands anointed and consecrated to the service
of God and the salvation of souls; day and
night should they be elevated to Heaven, to
praise the Lord, to call down upon men His
mercies and blessings.
Et elevatis oculis in coelum ad te Deum Patrem
suum omnipotentem, tibi gratias agens benedixit
(and with His eyes lifted up toward heaven,
unto Thee, O God, His Almighty Father, giving thanks to Thee, He did bless). While the
priest pronounces these words, he performs
the corresponding ceremonies, so as to imitate and do, as far as possible, what the Savior did at the institution of the Eucharist: for
a moment the priest looks up at the Crucifix
on the altar, and then bows His head, thereby
to signify and to express Christ’s thanksgiving, and he makes over the Host the sign of
the Cross, thus appropriately to represent the
blessing of the Savior.
Christ’s looking up to His Almighty Father,
as also the giving of thanks and the blessing
of the bread connected therewith, indicates
not only the greatness and sublimity of the
mystery which He was about to accomplish,
but served at the same time as a preparation
for the Consecration, and as the making ready
of the matter to be consecrated.
Fregit deditque discipulis suis, dicens: Accipite et manducate ex hoc omnes (He broke and
gave to His disciples, saying: Take and eat
ye all of this). The Church in the celebration
of the Sacrifice follows her divine Lord and
Master step by step: the breaking of the sacramental species ( fregit) and the distribution
of the Eucharistic bread (dedit) cannot take
place until after the Consecration, while the
majestic thanksgiving prayer of the Preface
(gratias agens), and the manifold blessing of
the sacrificial matter (benedixit) have already
an appropriate place before the Consecration.
The priest, in the midst of a solemn silence
that shuts out from him all the noise of the
world, humbly bowing down at the altar, pronounces “in the person of Christ,” with the
deepest attention, devotion and reverence the
mighty words:
Hoc est enim Corpus meum.
51

LITURGY

52

And now there is no longer bread on the
altar, but under the appearances that remain
of bread, Christ’s Body is truly present. In
a moment the power of God has wrought a
series of miracles, more magnificent and glorious than all the wonders of creation. The
tiny Host now contains in itself infinitely
more treasures, riches and glory than are to
be found on the vast expanse of the globe.
By virtue of the words of Consecration,
Christ’s Body becomes present, veiled under
the appearance of bread, and, indeed, His
glorified Body, which shines in the glory of
heaven; but this Body is immortal, impassi-

It is only fitting and just that we should fall
down on our knees before Him.

ble, with the Precious Blood flowing through
it, vivified by the most holy soul, united to
the Eternal Godhead. Therefore, in the Host
Christ is present, whole and entire, the hidden Savior, with His divinity and humanity.
The same God-Man who lives and reigns in
heaven in inconceivable majesty and beauty,
is now mysteriously and under sacramental
appearances present in our very midst. The
gates of heaven open and in the company of
invisible choirs of angels the King of Heaven
descends upon the altar, and this spot of the
earth becomes a paradise; the priest holds his
Creator, Redeemer and Judge in his hands.

Simili modo postquam coenatum est, accipiens et hunc praeclarum Calicem in... manus suas
(In like manner, after supper, taking also
this excellent chalice into His... hands). At
these words the priest takes up the chalice in
his hands and slightly elevates it. After the
Old Testament Paschal Supper was over, the
Lord consecrated the bread, and immediately afterward followed the Consecration of the
chalice.
The Savior took “this excellent chalice”
(hunc praeclarum Calicem): the identity of this
chalice and that of the Last Supper is perfect,
that is, numerically so, only after the Consecration; then there is here as there altogeth-

The Angelus u September - October 2021

The Consecration of the Chalice
In like manner, after supper, taking also this
excellent chalice into His holy and venerable hands:
and giving thanks to Thee, He blessed, and gave
to His disciples, saying: Take, and drink ye all
of it: For this is the Chalice of My Blood, of
the new and eternal testament: the mystery
of faith: which shall be shed for you, and for
many, unto the remission of sins. As often as
you do these things, ye shall do them in remembrance of Me.

LITURGY

er the same Blood in both chalices: “This is
the chalice of My Blood.” The Savior blessed the chalice likewise with thanksgiving,
as He had previously done with the bread.
He then pronounced over the blessed wine
those holy words which the priest now in His
stead pronounces over the chalice, to change
the material element into the divine Blood of
Christ: Hic est enim Calix Sanguinis mei, “For
this is the chalice of My Blood,” that is, this
is My Blood which is contained in the chalice. According to the common opinion these
words constitute the essential formula for the
Consecration of the chalice; for they signify
and effect the presence of the Blood of Christ
under the appearances of wine.
In the chalice is the Blood of the “new and
eternal testament.” At the foot of Sinai the old
covenant, whose promises were only earthly,
and which was to continue but for a time, was
concluded with the blood of animals. But by
Christ’s sacrificial Blood which is in the chalice, the “new” covenant of grace was established and sealed and is called under a twofold
aspect “the eternal” covenant: first, because
the gifts and blessings appertaining to it are
heavenly and imperishable; again, because
the new covenant will ever remain in force
and its validity endure to the end of days.
The exclamatory phrase in the middle:
mysterium fidei, “the mystery of faith,” indicates the unsearchable depth and obscurity of
the Eucharistic Sacrifice. That the God-Man
shed His Blood for us on the Cross, and that
He again sheds it for us in a mystical manner
on the altar is an adorable divine achievement which includes in itself the sum of the
most unheard-of wonders, all of which can be
acknowledged and believed as true only in the
light and the power of faith. Christ’s sacrificial Blood in the chalice is a mystery of faith
in the fullest sense of the term.
After the priest has pronounced the words
of Consecration, he again genuflects, to venerate the infinitely precious and adorable
Blood of Christ in the chalice. At the same
time, he pronounces the words: “As often
as ye do these things, ye shall do them in
remembrance of Me,” with which the Savior instituted the Christian priesthood and
the perpetual Sacrifice of the New Law as a

commemorative celebration of His redeeming
passion and death.
By the separate Consecration of the Host
and of the chalice, Christ’s Body and Blood
are rendered present under the twofold
appearances of bread and wine, that is, as
sacrificed. The twofold Consecration is a mystical shedding of blood, and places before our
eyes in a most lively manner the bloody death
of Christ sacrificed on the Cross. The Sacrifice on the altar is, indeed, painless; for the
Savior is no longer passible and can no longer
suffer death. But His divinely human Heart is
here inflamed with the same love of sacrifice,
and is moved by the same obedience of His
Father to sacrifice Himself as when He was
on the Cross. This love and this obedience
urged Him to sacrifice Himself mystically on
the altar also under the twofold sacramental
appearances. It is at the moment of Consecration that the Sacrifice is accomplished.

The Elevation
Immediately after pronouncing the words
of Consecration, the priest in all reverence
elevates first the Host and afterward the chalice in like manner, lifting up the Divine Sacrificial Victim for adoration, whilst he himself
keeps his eyes riveted on the Holy of Holies.
The principal object of the elevation is adoration; as the celebrant genuflects before and
after the Elevation, adoring with faith and
humility, thus also all who assist at the Mass
should be moved and impelled at the sight
of the Blessed Sacrament, to render to the
God and Savior therein concealed due adoration through their humble and reverent
deportment, as well as by the interior oblation of themselves to Him. After the birth of
Christ, heaven and earth sent adorers to the
crib at Bethlehem: the same happens at the
appearance of the Eucharistic Savior on the
altar. Then, as St. Gregory says (Dial. IV, 58),
“Heaven opens at the words of the priest, and
the choirs of angels surround the altar,” to
admire and to adore the Divine Mysteries.

53

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

Judging a Tree
by Its Fruits
Fr. Alain Lorans, SSPX

After the Council opened the Church
to the modern world, what future lay
in store for parishes and seminaries?
Considering the consequences of the
Council’s openness to the modern world for
parishes and seminaries is not only for statisticians and sociologists. Considering the
fruits necessarily implies wondering what tree
produced them. It implies drawing a connection between effects and a cause. It implies
considering a causal relation and therefore a
responsibility.
And these considerations are those of a
historian, a philosopher, a theologian, not a
statistician or a sociologist. The latter consider how many and how, but rarely the why
and the wherefore. They describe more than
they explain. They make observations without seeking a cause, especially if it could
look like an accusation or a search for who
is responsible.
In this presentation of the way the Council opened the Church to the modern world
and the influence this had on religious practice and the number of vocations, we will not
disregard the facts and numbers, but we will
not stop there. The facts are also effects and

54

The Angelus u September - October 2021

they have a cause, unless we believe in spontaneous generation…
Since a topic as delicate as establishing the
causal relation, and therefore a responsibility
and even culpability between the Council and
its fruits puts us in a position to be accused
of choosing sides or being “Traditionalist,”
we shall simply cite the testimony of a convert from progressivism on the evolution in
the Church since the Council. He will testify
and the reader will be free to form his own
opinion.

Eloquent numbers
Let us start with some official numbers;
they are neither progressivist nor traditionalist, they are simply eloquent.
In France, in the middle of the 1960’s, 94%
of a generation was baptized, 25% went to
Mass every Sunday and 80% of children made
their Solemn Communion. Today, about 2% of
Catholics attend Sunday Mass (1.8% according to a survey by Ipsos for La Croix in 2017)
and only about 30% of children are baptized
before the age of seven.
In 1901, there were 1,733 priestly ordinations for the diocesan clergy, and in 1965, at
the end of Vatican Council II, there were 646.

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

In 2020, there were only 46 diocesan priests
ordained, which forced the seminaries of
Lille and Bordeaux to close. In 2021, based
on the number of deacons in the seminaries,
there will be 36 diocesan priests and 54 religious priests or members of priestly societies
ordained.
La Verité des chiffres legitimately predicts
that many dioceses will have to prepare to
see their presbyterium go practically extinct,
especially since the low number of ordinations is concentrated in just a few dioceses,
essentially Paris, Versailles and Toulon.
Based on the statistics, the editor of La
Vérité des chiffres points out two elements he
believes to be absolutely essential to counter the drastic drop in priestly vocations: the
sacramental life of families, and in particular,
Confirmation around the age of six or seven,
and the broadest possible recognition of the
celebration of the traditional Mass.
Otherwise, comments Jean-Pierre Maugendre on the website Renaissance catholique,
“the current trends look bound to continue,”
for “the same causes produce the same effects
[and de facto] there does not seem to be any
major questioning of the principles that led to
the present situation.”
He goes on to add that:
The question will inevitably arise as to
whether to keep dioceses that are no longer
anything more than administrative structures
with no sacramental life, for lack of priests,
and practically no Christian families, for lack
of sacraments. But the future is in God’s hands.
In 1976, Paul Vigneron, in his book Histoire des
crises du clergé français contemporain (History of the
Crises of the Contemporary French Clergy, Téqui
1976), called on the bishops, in the face of the
oncoming disaster, “to simply and loyally try
the methods of apostolate and spirituality that
[they had] rejected, perhaps too boldly, thirty
years earlier.” To do so, he remarked, they
would have to “admit at last that [they had
been] mistaken.”

In Germany, a country currently being
affected by the application of an extremely
progressivist “Synodal Way,” the increasing
number of Catholics falling away is easy to
count thanks to the church tax: those who no
longer wish to pay it for one reason or another

declare that they are no longer Catholic and
are considered to have left the Church.
The July 10, 2020 issue of Augsburger Allgemeine reveals that in 2019, 272,771 faithful
left the Catholic Church, which is 26% more
than in 2018. This is no slow and imperceptible erosion; it is a significant disengagement.
Again, according to the same source, there
were only 57 ordinations for the 27 dioceses
of Germany in 2019, and last year there were
55. In the 60’s and 70’s, there were about 300
new priests every year; in 2000, there were
154. In other words, in 20 years, the number
of priests ordained has dropped by 60%.
We could take these numbers as a fatality
and simply recognize their reality, but that
would scarcely be satisfying intellectually. We
are therefore inclined to wonder why: what is
the cause of this dizzying drop? Of course, it
is impossible not to take into account the secularization of contemporary society, but does
not the Council’s openness to this world and
its modernity reveal that the Church herself
has begun a process of self-secularization?

Can we see the facts without
seeking their cause?
Going beyond simple statistics, sociologists
have analyzed them and, without establishing
a causal relation between the two, pointed out
a “proximity” between the Council and the
decline in religious practice. Without being
the cause, Vatican II was supposedly a “trigger.”
55

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

Here is what Guillaume Cuchet says in
Comment notre monde a cessé d’être chrétien (How
Our World Ceased to Be Christian, Seuil, 2018);
for him, the decline in religious practice did
indeed begin as early as 1965, the year Vatican II ended:
We do not see any other contemporary
event that could have caused such a reaction.
The chronology shows that it was not only the
way the Council was applied after it closed that
cause this rupture. By its very existence, insofar
as it suddenly made the reform of the former
standards imaginable, the Council was enough
to overturn them, especially since the liturgical
reform affecting the most visible part for most
people started being applied in 1964 (p. 130).

Without ever entering into what he calls
“the traditionalist or fundamentalist debate,”
Cuchet offers a prudent explanation:
In the realm of piety, certain aspects of
the liturgical reform that may have seemed
secondary but psychologically and anthropologically speaking were not, such as the use
of the vernacular, the familiar tone used to
address God, Communion in the hand, and the
relativization of former obligations, played an
important role (p. 134).

But he offers another explanation that
directly involves one of the conciliar texts, the
one on religious liberty, Dignitatis Humanae
(Dec. 7, 1965):
The text seemed like an unofficial permission to judge for oneself in matters of
belief, behavior and practice. The fact is that
this recent consecration of a sort of Catholic
Aufklärung, according to Kant’s definition of
the Enlightenment (as a freedom to think for

56

The Angelus u September - October 2021

oneself), contrasted strongly with the former
regime. The theologian Louis Bouyer summed
up the situation perfectly in 1968 with the sad
phrase, “Each person now only believes and
practices what he feels like” (p. 132-133).

In a word, the faithful took for their own
personal use the “right of persons and communities to social and civil freedom in religious matters” that the Council proclaimed
against all the former and constant teaching
of the Church.
Another sociologist whose analysis is not
without interest is Jérôme Fourquet, who in
L’Archipel français, naissance d’une nation multiple et divisée (The French Archipelago, The Birth
of a Multiple and Divided Nation, Seuil, 2019)
remarks that France has become an archipelago, that is to say, a series of islands with
little left in common because they lack the
very idea of a common good. And when he
wonders when exactly France became this
“multiple and divided nation,” he answers—
basing himself on G. Cuchet’s work—that it
was when the “Catholic matrix” disappeared;
after that, everything fell apart, becoming
scattered like an archipelago. Various communities appeared, a Muslim community, a
Jewish community, a Catholic community,
an organic community, a vegan community,
a homosexual community… But they ignore
each other. They are side by side and no longer form a society, but rather a dissociety, to
borrow the expression of the philosopher
Marcel De Corte.
The influence of the liturgical reform and
of the doctrine of religious liberty over the
faithful and the disappearance of the Church’s
role as a “matrix” in society are, according

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

to these sociologists, the factors that make
Vatican II a “trigger” of the crisis in religious
practice and in vocations. But was it really
only a “trigger”?
After the inter-religious declaration of Abu
Dhabi (Feb. 4, 2019), cosigned by Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, and
after the idolatrous worship of the Pachamama in the Vatican Gardens on Oct. 4, 2019,
theologians have admitted there is a clearer
causal relation.

A Council that is responsible
but not guilty?
In an article published on June 1, 2020 on
LifeSiteNews, Bishop Athanasius Schneider,
auxiliary bishop of Astana in Kazakhstan,
declared that there is “no divine positive will
or natural right to the diversity of religions”
and he showed that the Declaration of Abu
Dhabi was the logical consequence of the religious liberty promoted by Vatican Council II:
There is sufficient reason to suggest that a
cause-and-effect relationship exists between
the Second Vatican Council’s Declaration on
Religious Freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, and
the Document on Human Fraternity for World
Peace and Living Together, signed by Pope Francis
and Sheik Ahmed el-Tayeb in Abu Dhabi, on
February 4, 2019. On his return flight to Rome
from the United Arab Emirates, Pope Francis
himself told journalists: “There is one thing
… I would like to say. I openly reaffirm this:
from the Catholic point of view the Document
does not move one millimeter away from the
Second Vatican Council. It is even cited, several times. The Document was crafted in the
spirit of the Second Vatican Council.”1

The Kazakh prelate pointed out the rupture introduced by the conciliar declaration
Dignitatis Humanae, which sets forth
a theory never before taught by the constant
Magisterium of the Church, i.e., that man has
the right founded in his own nature, “not to
be prevented from acting in religious matters
according to his own conscience, whether
privately or publicly, whether alone or in
association with others, within due limits” (ut
in re religiosa neque impediatur, quominus iuxta
suam conscientiam agat privatim et publice, vel solus
vel aliis consociatus, intra debitos limites, n. 2).
According to this statement, man would have
the right, based on nature itself (and therefore
positively willed by God) not to be prevented
from choosing, practicing and spreading, also
collectively, the worship of an idol, and even
the worship of Satan, since there are religions
that worship Satan, for instance, the “church of
Satan.” Indeed, in some countries, the “church
of Satan” is recognized with the same legal
value as all other religions.

In an article published on June 10, 2020
on Chiesa e post concilio, Archbishop Carlo
Maria Viganò, former apostolic nuncio to
the United States, approved Bishop Schneider’s analysis without sharing his opinion as
to a possible solution to the present doctrinal
crisis. He said the Council needs more than
a correction; it needs to be condemned. He
did, however, write,
The merit of [Bishop Schneider’s] essay lies
first of all in its grasp of the causal link between
the principles enunciated or implied by Vatican II and their logical consequent effect in
the doctrinal, moral, liturgical, and disciplinary
deviations that have arisen and progressively
developed to the present day.2

57

The two prelates recognized a causal relation between the conciliar document on religious liberty and the inter-religious declaration of Abu Dhabi. Would this be enough to
persuade the supporters of Vatican II that it
was responsible for the present doctrinal and
pastoral crisis? It would have been naïve to
believe so.
For the fact of the matter is that despite its
bitter fruits that have been thoroughly tasted, the Council does not wish to be judged
by its effects but only by its ability to inspire
dreams, its ability to answer contemporary
utopias. It is noteworthy that Pope Francis
does not hesitate to use the word “dream”
repeatedly, and even ad nauseam.
In his exhortation Querida Amazonia (Feb.
12, 2020), he proposes no less than four
dreams: a social dream, a cultural dream, an
ecological dream and an ecclesial dream. In
his encyclical Fratelli Tutti (Oct. 4, 2020), he
declares,
Let us dream, then, as a single human
family, as fellow travelers sharing the same
flesh, as children of the same earth, which is
our common home, each of us bringing the
58

The Angelus u September - October 2021

richness of his or her beliefs and convictions,
each of us with his or her own voice, brothers
and sisters all (§8).3

And in his book Let Us Dream (Simon and
Schuster, Dec. 2020), he invites the reader
to “Come, let us talk this over. Let us dare
to dream…” Which Msgr. Benoist de Sinety
translates in his presentation of the French
version of the papal text as: the pope invites
us “to dream not small, personal and self-sufficient dreams, but to dream together, to
dream big.”
Dreams ignore the laws of real life. A
dream scenario is completely emancipated
from the principle of causality, and the effects
in it have no proportionate cause. A dream
tree is not to be judged by its fruits. And just
as you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink, it is very difficult to bring
back to reality a conciliar mind that wants
to dream.
Which is why the testimony of a simple layman proves useful. He offers no sociological
or philosophical or theological analysis, but
simply common sense. The common sense
that tells us there is no smoke without fire.

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

The testimony of a convert
Aldo Maria Valli is a journalist who specializes in religious issues. He comes from
progressivism, having been close with Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, the archbishop of
Milan who inspires Pope Francis. On July 12,
2020, he explained on his blog how he discovered Tradition. I will let him speak and only
add as little as possible.
For many people of my generation (I was
born in 1958), the Council was not a problem
for decades: it was simply a fact. Born and
raised in the post-conciliar Church, for a long
time I saw the Council as something ineluctable: at a given time, the Church had to make
certain choices. (…)
Now that I am getting older and feel the
need to go to the essential of the Faith, it seems
to me that I can say, in all humility and as a
simple baptized Catholic, that the Council was
inspired by a deadly mistake: the desire to please
the world.
I realize that my declaration may seem
hasty, and I apologize to the specialists in the
matter, but the more I study the years of the
Council, the more convinced I am that there
was a sort of inferiority complex in large parts
of the Church, beginning with John XXIII,
with regards to the world, a world that, at the
time, was in complete upheaval and seemed
so alive. Hence the desire not to seem behind
but to show a sympathetic side of the Church,
in the literal sense of the word, sympathetic
as in one who suffers with, who participates in
the joys and pangs, avoiding any position of
superiority or judgmental attitude.
I remember that when I used to speak of
the Council with Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, the archbishop of Milan liked to use the
expression “the Church of the Council as a
Church of intercession.” Interceding,
the cardinal would say, means walking
in the middle, and that is what John
XXIII wanted to do: walk in the middle
of the world, without rising above or
going ahead, but also without falling
behind.
Martini used to say that for him,
the Council was like opening the windows and letting fresh air into a church
that smelled musty and moldy. That
is exactly what he said, and I thought
I saw them, those men of faith who,
inspired by all those intellectual stimuli,
passionately discussed theological and
moral issues so that the word of the

Gospel could once again shine in all its beauty
and novelty, relieved of its pitfalls and inlays.

But, says, A. M. Valli,
the underlying problem remains, and I
mentioned it earlier: the desire to please the
world. Now I obviously do not wish to psychoanalyze the Council, but it is truly difficult
not to get the impression that deep down, this
need was there. Pope Roncalli’s optimism
was that of someone who, tired of a Church
lagging behind the world and considered as a
sort of surly and hateful old aunt, wished her
to be seen as a loving and gentle mother, trustworthy and welcoming. An understandable
desire. Were it not for the fact that the minute
the Church, more or less consciously, wishes
to please the world, she inevitably begins to
betray herself and to betray her mission. For Jesus
never wished to please the world or lessen His
standards to appear friendly and dialogue.

And indeed, St. Paul tells us, “Noli conformari
huic saeculo—And be not conformed to this
world” (Rom. 12:2). That is how the Catholic
identity disappears and the “Catholic matrix,”
to borrow Jérôme Fourquet’s expression, disappears from society, leaving it to become an
archipelago.
A. M. Valli goes on to explain,
With the Council, the windows were indeed
opened, and the air came in. But along with a
pleasant sensation of freshness came the ideas
of the world, marked by sin, and the Church
was contaminated.
What does “marked by sin” mean? In a
word, it means marked by the desire to put man
in God’s place, because deep down that is what it
is today, that is what it was yesterday and that
is what it has always been.

Aldo Maria Valli, well-known Vaticanist.
59

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

Of course, not everything began with the
Council, for certain underground rivers had
already been flowing for a while, but the Council was the moment when the desire to please
the world, and therefore to put man in God’s
place, clearly emerged.

He goes on to point out the ineluctable
effect of this vast update that was, in fact, an
update to correspond to the taste of the times.
But the true tragedy of the Council lay
elsewhere. The Church began her update and
renewal after the world. It is always the same
thing. When the Church tries to be like the
world, she lags behind. Because the world on
the path of sin, that is, in its attempt to put man
in God’s place, moves quickly and is always
inventing new things, and the Church, however hard she tries, cannot keep up.
Thus, the Council set off after the world at
the very moment when the world was already
realizing, albeit confusedly, that man’s desire
for independence from God could lead only to
enormous disasters in every respect, be it social
and political or cultural and moral.
Within the Church, few people realized
that this “operation friendliness” was marked
by obvious theological contradictions but also
by a strategic mistake. The dominant version of
the story said the opposite, and against a story
imposed with great intensity (by some with
good intentions and true enthusiasm, by others
dishonestly and with ulterior motives), very
little can be done, as we see today.

This “strategic mistake” that consisted in
adapting the Church to the spirit of the modern world and by this very fact forcing her
to lag behind was mentioned by the historian Patrick Buisson in his recent book La fin
d’un monde (The End of a World, Algin Michel,
2021):
This Christianity partially reduced to
humanism, to a holy parousia of “Man” in
whose name they were summoned to kneel
before the world, this sudden infatuation for
the human sciences, came at the very time
when a theoretical anti-humanism was developing with the Marxist philosopher Louis
Althuser, and when Michel Foucault was
announcing the “death of man” as a “figure of
knowledge” in Les Mots et les Choses (Words and
Things, 1966). The supposed common basis
shared by believers and unbelievers was unexpectedly crumbling under the feet of the con60

The Angelus u September - October 2021

ciliar fathers whose brand-new aggiornamento
was seen by shrewder observers as already
behind the times.

The conciliar clergy did not stop at adopting the clothing fashions, dressing as civilians
to fit in with the masses; they also espoused
the intellectual fashions: Freudo-Marxism,
structuralism… fashions whose proper characteristic it is to go out of fashion.

An accusing testimony
But back to Aldo Maria Valli, who points
out the practical incoherency of the Council at the conclusion of his testimony: “It is
curious to see how the Council, that wished
to be non-dogmatic, itself became a dogma.”
In his presentation of a collective work entitled L’altro Vaticano II (The Other Vatican II,
­Chorabooks, 2021), he proposed on his blog
on January 30 a way to undo this incoherency, suggesting that Vatican II be “de-dogmatized.” This
Council that wished to be non-dogmatic, itself
became a dogma. If we were to consider it as
an event with multiple facets, with the hopes
it gave us, but also with its intrinsic limits and
the errors of perspective that marked it, we
would be serving the Church and the quality
of our Faith well. Often, looking at the origins
of an illness causes a feeling of sadness, and an
insidious impression of failure can arise. But
that is what we have to do if we wish to find
the path to a cure.

And he paid homage to the founder of the
Society of St. Pius X:
Half a century after the end of the Council,
it is finally necessary to deepen the substance
of the questions raised by Archbishop Lefebvre, but also by many other observers and
representatives of the Church, including the
recent stances taken by Archbishop Viganò
and Bishop Schneider.

The testimony of a simple layman shares the
critical judgments of these two prelates, 45
years after Abp. Lefebvre’s I Accuse the Council
(1976). He fully shares these judgments that
explain what he has seen and undergone.
Regarding the “hermeneutics of reform
in continuity” promoted by Benedict XVI in

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

2005 in an attempt to clear the Council, Aldo
Maria Valli writes:
The hermeneutics of continuity do not hold
up to the facts. For example, as far as the social
kingship of Christ and the objective falseness of
non-Christian religions go, Vatican II marks a
rupture with the teaching of the previous popes
and leads to the objectively unacceptable
declaration of Abu Dhabi signed by Francis.
Accusing critics of being attached to a past
that needs to be left behind implicitly affirms
the need to “go beyond” the teaching of all the
popes up until Pius XII. But “such a theological position,” observes Bishop Schneider, “is
ultimately Protestant and heretical, since the
Catholic Faith implies an uninterrupted tradition, an uninterrupted continuity, without any
perceptible doctrinal and liturgical rupture.”

By rejecting Benedict XVI’s attempt to
save the Council, Aldo Maria Valli returns
to Archbishop Lefebvre’s debate with Paul
VI almost half a century ago.
Today, in the year 2021, it is time to abandon the unfortunate method of “making circles
square,” in other words, trying to justify the
unjustifiable. The expression “hermeneutics of
continuity” cannot be used as a magic formula
to hide reality, and the reality is that the Council brought with it the seeds of the catastrophe we
have before our eyes today.

Which is what Archbishop Viganò declared
in a study published on One Peter Five on September 21, 2020: “The Abu Dhabi Declaration would not have been conceivable without
the premise of Lumen Gentium.”4

A. M. Valli’s testimony helps us to understand why we are so
uncomfortable with this
Church lagging behind,
running after the world,
trying to keep up, to
please and above all
not to displease: she is
no longer a beacon, but
rather a red light pathetically hoping to become
a beacon again by multiplying her repentances,
thus denying those who

came before.
That is the true cause of our suffering at
seeing the men of the Church try to seduce
the enemies of the Church, forgetting that she
has a treasure with which to convert them.
The alarming statistics that we discussed at
the beginning of this conference are simply a
sign, a sort of thermometer. They are important, and rather than breaking the thermometer, we need to look for the cause of the fever:
the infection. It is ideological.
In the face of this general crisis, the conciliar Catholics excuse themselves, saying
that contemporary society is complex, when
they should really be accusing themselves and
admitting that they have a complex. Their
new pastoral approach is based on an inferiority complex. An unavowed and unavowable
complex, for it reveals a loss of the Faith: they
espouse the ideas of the world, forgetting that
the Church is the spouse of Christ.

Uncovering bitter fruits
But a question remains: what particular
event made Aldo Maria Valli understand
the responsibility of the Council? What fruit
made him judge the tree? When questioned
on Radio Spada on Feb. 27, 2021, he explained
how he had discovered Tradition and the
effects of Vatican Council II on the life of
the Church:
All in all, I believe that the fundamental
incoherency towards Tradition was already
present in the opening speech by John XXIII,
Gaudet Mater Ecclesia. When claiming that the
Council’s task was to defend and spread a sure
61

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

doctrine, the pope said, “Nowadays however,
the Spouse of Christ prefers to make use of the
medicine of mercy rather than that of severity.”5 There is the rub. From a Christian point
of view, it is not logical to oppose mercy and
severity. In fact, severity in the defense and
spread of true doctrine is the highest form of
mercy, for its purpose is the salvation of souls.
Through this crack, made at the very beginning
of the Council, relativism crept into the Church,
and abuse and treason found their way in. In
a word, the world entered in and man was put
in the place of God. The work of subversion
had already begun long before, it is true, but
the Council acted as a detonator, also due to
an unjustifiably optimistic attitude towards
modernity.

But the precise event that opened his eyes
was this:
The triggering factor was the publication
of Amoris Laetitia in 2016. My doubts were
already there at the beginning of this century
and had progressively increased since 2013,
with the election of Francis, but the apostolic
exhortation “on love in the family” opened my
eyes for good and for all. I was forced to see
that at that point, ambiguity and relativism had
not only entered into the Church but had taken
on the form of her Magisterium. I have to say
that at first, as far as Amoris Laetitia goes, I was
so incredulous that I denied the obvious. I read
it several times, and, in the end, I had to face
the painful reality. The document is imbued
with the idea that God has a duty to forgive
and man has a right to be forgiven, otherwise
it would be necessary to convert. The eternal
divine law is bent to accommodate the supposed
autonomy of man. The concept of discernment
is instrumentalized to exonerate sin. I would
say that Amoris Laetitia validated the revolution
that had taken place: not a change of paradigm
(a vague expression used to justify the subversion), but the triumph of the modernist vision
both in its contents and in its method.

He was therefore forced to judge the current pope, without falling into sedevacantism
that he explicitly rejects.
The perspective adopted by Pope Bergoglio seems to be that of the world, which often
does not completely reject the idea of God
but rejects the aspects that are less in keeping
with the dominant permissiveness. The world
62

The Angelus u September - October 2021

does not want a true father—loving insofar as
he also judges—but a buddy, or better yet, a
traveling companion who allows anything and
says, “Who am I to judge?” And Francis offers
the world this god who is not a father but a
traveling companion. That is why I maintain
that Francis does not act like a pope, because
he does not confirm his brothers in the Faith.
The proof of this is that he is applauded by
those far from the Faith and the Church, who
feel confirmed in being far, whereas his ambiguities and deviations disconcert those closer.

***
At the end of this first part, we can concede
that the Council is not the only cause of the
crises in vocations and the dizzying drop in
religious practice, or of the doctrinal, moral
and liturgical rupture with the bi-millennial
Tradition, but it is inadmissible for this Council to be the one and only event in the history
of the Church that we have no right to question, as if it were an untouchable dogma, a
sanctuaried truth.
Endnotes:
1

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/bishop-schneiderhow-church-could-correct-erroneous-view-that-god-willsdiversity-of-religions

2

https://www.marcotosatti.com/2020/06/10/vigano-writeson-the-vatican-ii-we-are-at-the-redde-rationem/

3

https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/
documents/papa-francesco_20201003_enciclica-fratelli-tutti.
html

4

https://onepeterfive.com/archbishop-vigano-is-vatican-ii-untouchable/

4

https://scalar.usc.edu/works/god-man-and-the-universeweek-two/gaudet-mater-ecclesia

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Fr. Juan Carlos Iscara, SSPX

Aquinas counts vengeance
among the virtues. But isn’t
taking revenge a bad thing?
Among the social virtues, those that facilitate the life of men in society, St. Thomas lists
vindicta—which we should translate by “just
punishment” to avoid the pejorative sense that
the words “revenge” or “vengeance” usually
has in English. It is a virtue related to the cardinal virtue of justice that aims at punishing
the wrongdoer for the crime committed.
Unfortunately, when it comes to the punishment of criminals, the modern world seems
to oscillate at whim between two extremes,
disproportionate harshness and excessive
leniency. Therefore, it is necessary to clari-

fy what we understand for “vengeance,” just
punishment.
There is no doubt that restoring the order
disturbed by a bad action is a good and virtuous work, demanded by justice itself and the
need to preserve social order. However, due
to our fallen nature, in the infliction of punishment it is very easy to get carried away by
sinful motives (disorderly anger, hatred of the
criminal, etc.), which would make such punishment lose its justice, its virtuous character,
turning it into a true sin.
St. Thomas explains all this:
Vengeance consists in the infliction of a
penal evil on one who has sinned. Accordingly,
in the matter of vengeance, we must consider
the mind of the avenger. For if his intention
is directed chiefly to the evil of the person on
whom he takes vengeance and rests there, then
63

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

his vengeance is altogether unlawful: because
to take pleasure in another’s evil belongs
to hatred, which is contrary to the charity
whereby we are bound to love all men. Nor is
it an excuse that he intends the evil of one who
has unjustly inflicted evil on him, as neither is a
man excused for hating one that hates him: for
a man may not sin against another just because
the latter has already sinned against him, since
this is to be overcome by evil, which was
forbidden by the Apostle, who says (Romans
12:21): “Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil by good.” If, however, the avenger’s
intention be directed chiefly to some good, to
be obtained by means of the punishment of
the person who has sinned (for instance that
the sinner may amend, or at least that he may
be restrained and others be not disturbed, that
justice may be upheld, and God honored), then
vengeance may be lawful, provided other due
circumstances be observed (Summa Theologica,
II-II, 108,1).

With these distinctions the true meaning
and the dangers of this virtue become clear.
For greater abundance, St. Thomas examines
some objections that may be raised against it
and, in solving them, rounds off the doctrine.
Some object that he who takes revenge
usurps a function exclusively of God (Deut.
32:35), and that is sin. St. Thomas answers
that whoever exercises vengeance on the
wicked in the exercise of his functions and
jurisdiction—for example, the civil authorities—does not usurp anything from God, but
uses the power that He grants him (Rom.
13:4). But if someone takes revenge outside of
the order established by God, he usurps what
is proper to Him, and therefore sins.
Others, more pious, object that those who
are good must tolerate the bad and endure
patiently their injuries. St. Thomas points out
that this is how it should be when those injuries refer to their own persons, but not if they
are injuries against God or against neighbor.
Because, as St. John Chrysostom says, “to be
patient with one’s injuries is worthy of praise;
but to want to conceal injuries against God
is impious.”
In practice, it will rarely be convenient
for a private person to attempt, by himself,
64

The Angelus u September - October 2021

to punish the guilty (except by repelling
an unjust aggression in legitimate defense),
because under the pretext of justice and equity an exacerbated self-love and perhaps true
hatred of neighbor will often be hidden. That
is why it is always advisable to forgive the
injuries of others instead of punishing them,
unless the honor of God, the common good
or the amendment of others require that we
demand reparation for the injury.

Which are the natural
properties of marriage?
There are two, unity and indissolubility.
These properties derive from the very nature
and ends of marriage. Therefore, they do not
depend on the will of the spouses, and they
are not affected by the accidental circumstances of a concrete marriage.
Unity is the bond existing between one man
and one woman. It is demanded by the primary end of marriage, which is procreation and
education of children. It opposes polyandry
(one woman with many husbands), as it makes
paternity uncertain and, in consequence, it
makes also uncertain to whom belongs the
duty of education of the children. Moreover, it
is unnatural not to know, and therefore honor,
one’s father. Strictly speaking, it is not against
polygamy (one man with many women), but it
also causes serious difficulties, both regarding
the education of children and the secondary
end of marriage.
Unity is also demanded by the secondary
end of marriage, the mutual love and support
of the spouses. Polygamy causes an inequality of rights between the spouses, as the man
has full, exclusive rights on the women, but
not the women on man. Moreover, it affects
the real human and spiritual love and causes
discords and jealousies between women and
children.
Indissolubility signifies that the bond subsists as long as spouses live and it cannot be
dissolved by any motive. It is demanded by
the primary end, because both the care and

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

education of children require the permanent
union of spouses. Even if they do not have
children, the general rule is not affected by
concrete circumstances (the law is not founded on extraordinary cases).
In any case, the secondary end of marriage
still demands indissolubility. Human love is
not only sexual impulse—sex is integrated as
part of human love. Without indissolubility,
one risks falling prey to the selfishness of
instinct, and the union of the family being
abandoned to the vagaries of our movements
of pleasure. Indissolubility defends conjugal
love, as true love is needed for the mutual help
and perfection of the spouses.
The common life and support of the spouses requires daily effort. If the possibility of
divorce is allowed, it has a magnifying effect

on the unavoidable conf licts that arise in
common life.
Moreover, the dissolution of a marriage
affects the children morally and affectively,
and it is also injustice towards the spouse, as
the gift of self that was promised in the marriage ceremony is forgotten when difficulties
arise.

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

344 pp.–Hardcover–STK# 8343✱–$25.55

65

Thought for the Day
By Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
“WHAT WILL THIS NEW YEAR BE FOR US?
God only knows, but by our desire for sanctification we can turn for help to Our
Lord’s will to save our soul and all souls. How consoling it is to think that our everyday
life can be transformed into numerous graces of sanctification and Redemption! So it
was throughout the life of Our Lord and of the Virgin Mary.”
—Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (January 3rd Feast of St. Genevieve)
This little collection of quotes, taken from the sermons and writings of Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre, assigns a short reading to every day of the year. It is a beautiful and
simple way to practice daily recollection and elevate the mind to God. This new collection of the Archbishop’s words helps to develop the daily habits that can shape our
eternal destiny.
“With the shepherds, we will go to that little Child, and despite His frail appearance we will believe in His
divinity, confronting all those who, on the contrary, think of doing away with the Child as soon as He is born.
Herod is already sending his troops to kill all the infant boys less than two years old, hoping that this future King
will be among those children. Madman! He is opposing the One who comes to save him.”
—Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (December 28th Feast of the Holy Innocents)
191 pp. Softcover. STK# 8796. $12.95

For the Love of the Church
By Bishop Bernard Fellay
There have been many who attempted to change the Catholic Church from a divine
institution founded by Christ to a human institution of the world.
When such changes began to take place within the Church before, during, and
after the Second Vatican Council, Archbishop Lefebvre took a stand and founded the
Society for the express purpose of preserving the Catholic priesthood. This heroic
prelate consecrated bishops in 1988 to carry on this all-important mission, the fruits of
which include the preservation of the traditional Latin Mass and the sacred Tradition of
Holy Mother Church.
Bishop Bernard Fellay is one of those episcopally consecrated by the Archbishop.
After the death of Archbishop Lefevbre, Bishop Fellay went on to serve as the Superior
General of the Society of Saint Pius X from 1994 to 2018. Among his many acts as
Superior General, he worked for the canonical regularization of the Society of Saint Pius X and currently serves
as General Counselor of the Society alongside its current Superior General, Fr. Davide Pagliarani.
This book-length interview is the summation of Bishop Bernard Fellay’s understanding and advice on a
myriad of topics that affect Catholics and the Church today. The subjects covered include: the ongoing crisis in
the Church  marriage  abortion  human suffering  missionary work  relations between the Society and
Rome  and the priestly way of life in contemporary society.
Gain a profoundly Catholic perspective on the modern world from a bishop who labors to uphold the supreme law of the Catholic Church: the Salvation of souls.
A student of Charles Cardinal Journet, Robert Landers lives in Switzerland and is interested in the Catholic Church and its
role in the world today.
128 pp. Softcover. STK# 8786. $12.95

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

INTERVIEW

An Interview

With Fr. Jacques Emily, SSPX
Prior of St. John Vianney Priory & Chaplain of the SSPX
Sisters’ Novitiate in Browerville, MN
Fr. Dominique Bourmaud, SSPX

Dear Father, would
you tell us about your
apostolate in the US?
t was Fr. Arnauld Ros­
tand, who was then our
District Superior, who
appointed me Prior of
St. John Vianney Priory, as
well as Chaplain of our Society Sisters at the Sacred Heart
Novitiate in Browerville, in
August of 2014. After having
spent nine years at the Retreat
House in Los Gatos, California, preaching retreats, this
appointment came to me as
a big surprise. Nevertheless,
I received it with joyful gratitude, and since then, I sincerely thank God for the tremendous grace He has granted me
by this nomination.

I

Could you describe
your role of Chaplain
to the Novitiate?
To celebrate the daily Mass
for the Sisters, hear their confessions, teach classes to the
novices, and provide spiritu-

al conferences and recollections to the professed are the
main functions of the chaplain. Thus, it is a great consolation for a priest to be able,
by his ministry, to provide for
these chosen souls the graces
and blessings that Our Blessed Lord wants to infuse into
the hearts of His Spouses!

This is indeed the beautiful mission of the Chaplain,
which consists of being the
special intermediary between
the Divine Spouse and these
privileged souls who, by their
vows, espouse the Son of God
as their own!
What a sublime mission
for a priest to be called for
this apostolate! By this min67

PRIESTLY LIFE

istry, the chaplain intends to
help these spouses of Christ
to grow in their union with
Christ so that by the strength
of their intimacy with Him
they may more profusely diffuse the graces of their Divine
Spouse upon the Church and
the souls. It is thus, in the role
of intermediary between the
Divine Spouse and His religious spouses that the Chaplain exercises a certain spiritual paternity, which has been
granted by Christ Himself.
What a responsibility, but
also what a blessed consolation, to become a humble
instrument of God to contribute to the sanctification of the
spouses of Christ and thus,
by way of consequence, to
the sanctification of so many
souls! This is the wonderful
and consoling apostolate of a
Chaplain of religious sisters,
for which I am most grateful
to God for having called on
me for this endeavor at the
conclusion of my priestly life.
It seems, by this
description of your
task as Chaplain, that
you exercise a kind of
spiritual fatherhood
towards the sisters.
Can you explain to
what limit this spiritual
paternity extends?
Every priest is a father of
souls, no matter how specific or broad the ministry in
which he labors. So, in this
sense, the Chaplain of a religious community exercises a
certain paternity towards the
sisters as we just explained,
but not in the sense that he
68

The Angelus u September - October 2021

becomes the spiritual director
of the sisters. The ministry
of the spiritual direction of the
sisters belongs exclusively to
the Mistress of Novices.
Nevertheless, teaching
spirituality, giving spiritual
conferences, preaching recollections, and exercising
the ministry of confession,
definitively invest the Chaplain with a certain fatherly
inf luence over the spiritual
formation of these elite souls.
The Chaplain must never forget, however, that these religious souls belong exclusively to no one else other than
Jesus Christ Himself, as His
own and chosen spouses. So,
the fatherly influence of the
Chaplain over the formation
of sisters is entirely dependent
upon Jesus Christ: it comes
from Jesus Christ and leads
these consecrated souls to
Him.

This is certainly a serious
responsibility for the Chaplain, but it is also for him a tremendous consolation! Indeed,
the Chaplain knows, perhaps
more than anyone else, the
spiritual impact that the sisters have on the Church and
the world. He recognizes very
well the hidden but crucial
influence that they have on
the Heart of Jesus, through
their prayers and sacrifices,
for the sanctification and salvation of souls. And this is
true not only for the laity but
even more so for the sanctification of priests, which
is one of the most beneficial
and blessed purposes of their
vocation.
T he Chapla in is thus,
by his role as intermediary
between Jesus Christ and the
sisters, at the heart of this
apostolate of the contemplative souls for the Church and
salvation of souls. The more

INTERVIEW

the Chaplain can help the sisters to sanctify themselves,
the closer their union with
Christ becomes, and thus, the
greater and more abundant
the graces they obtain for the
Church and so many souls!
How many souls have been
and will be saved, thanks and
in proportion to the degree of
sanctity of our sisters? Only in
heaven will we know the tremendous work that they did
for the salvation of so many
souls and of so many priests.
Who can tell, for instance,
how many thousands of souls
and priests have been saved
by St. Therese of the Infant
Jesus?
We remember how Archbishop Lefevre had clearly
understood the efficacy of the
Contemplative Life to support
the apostolic work of the missionaries. As a result, when he
was in Africa, he consistent-

ly summoned Carmelites or
contemplative congregations
to come and settle near the
new foundations of the missionary Fathers.
How does your
apostolate with the
sisters and your
understanding of
the necessity of their
mission shape your
own spiritual life
and orientation?
Understanding the solemnity of the vocation to which
the sisters are called, the
Chaplain realizes that his own
role is consequently a very
sacred one. Upon the sanctity
of the sisters depends the salvation of their own souls, yes,
but also of countless others.
Their degree of holiness will
determine the perfection in
which they accomplish their
vocation. Thus, the Chap-

lain realizes that, so closely
involved in the spiritual missionary work of the sisters as
he is, he himself must focus
on his own sanctification if he
is to lead them in holiness. It
is a key motivation to realize
that the more our sisters grow
in holiness, the more souls
will be saved, the more graces the priests will receive for
their own sanctification, and
finally, the more families will
be sanctified. The spiritual
relationship between sisters
and priest is truly a symbiotic one—the sisters indeed
need the priests in order to
avail themselves of the graces
from Jesus Christ by the sacraments to become saints, but
the priests rely on the prayers
and sacrifices of the sisters for
their ministry and their own
sanctification.

69

PRIESTLY LIFE

What are the challenges
of your work? The joys?
This sublime mission of
our sisters for the Church, for
the sanctification of priests
and families and for the salvation of souls is precisely the
real challenge! How unworthy
the Chaplain feels to be chosen for such a mission! Keenly
aware of his role in the salvation of so many souls through
his cooperation with the work
of sanctification of the sisters,
the Chaplain is confronted
by his own unworthiness and
the enormity of the task he
is called to accomplish. This
allows the Chaplain to recognize, with great humility,
in Whom he must place all
his hopeful expectations, in
nothing else but on the grace
of Jesus Christ, that will support him to accomplish the
task entrusted to him.
But, if this mission is so
challenging, at the same time
it is the source of great consolation and joy to think that,
by this ministry, the Chaplain can contribute to the
spiritual formation of these
warriors of Christ. They are
indeed critical warriors, even
though serving in the shadows, they are far from being
useless soldiers, as men of little Faith might believe. Quite
the opposite, they are actually
fighting on the front line for
the victory of Christ the King
over his enemies.

70

The Angelus u September - October 2021

You mention the
misconception of the
sisters occupying a
place in the shadow
“at the back of Christ’s
army”; this is perhaps
due to their seeming
material inactivity. The
secular mindset would
assign more value to
physical work with
external results, than
to spiritual labors, and
would claim that these
women are wasting
their talents, stifling
their potential, and
hiding themselves
away to no purpose.
Can you comment
further on this?
In the words of Fr. Bernard-Marie de Chivre, “action
is defined above all by the
quality of what comes of it”
(The Mass of Saint Pius V, p. 5).
What can be of higher quality than the salvation of souls

for the glory of God? This
is something the world can
never understand. The greatest activity on earth takes
place hidden in the tabernacle. From His state of seeming inactivity, the Eucharistic
Heart of Jesus produces the
infinite intensity of the action
of Grace. Were the world to
lose the Eucharist, it would
fall apart. As St. Padre Pio
said: “The earth could exist
more easily without the sun
than without the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.”
Thus, it is in imitation of
the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus,
hidden in the Blessed Sacrament, that the sisters hide
themselves away in the “tabernacle” of their convent,
there to unite themselves to
His continual activity. With
the Sorrowful Mother at the
foot of the cross, they participate in her hidden but crucial
role of Co-Redemptrix. By
their prayers and penances,

INTERVIEW

they draw from the Eucharist, in union with Mary, those
countless graces which God
has determined to give only
as a result of being asked.
If it is by Her presence
at the foot of the Cross that
Mary became the Mother of
the elect, it is also by their
oblation and their presence
at the foot of the altar that our
Sisters participate in the spiritual maternity of Mary and
in her role as Co-Redemptrix.
This is the great vocation of our sisters: to continue what the Blessed Virgin,
Co-Redemptrix, did on Calvary and to participate in her
role as Mediatrix of All Grace
in heaven.
Without the spiritual support from these seemingly inactive women who are
“wasting their talents in the
convent,” countless graces
would be lost, active ministry
would fail, and souls would
not be saved. How many
priests owe their vocation to
their “little sisters” in the convent who continually support
them with their prayers and
sacrifices? St. Therese of the
Infant Jesus has been given
the title of Patroness of the
Missions precisely because of
her dedication to the spiritual
support of missionary priests
in foreign lands, all accomplished from her tiny cloister
in France.
Just as the heart is the
life-support of the body, just
as the mother is the spiritual
and emotional heart of the
home, just as the nurse is the
comfort and support of the
patient, just as Mary was the

hidden support and love of
Jesus, just as the Eucharist is
the hidden Life of the Church,
so the sisters are to the ministry of the priests, the conversion of sinners, the support
of families, the salvation of
souls. These are indeed the
marvelous and precious fruits
of the hidden activity of our
sisters that the world cannot
understand!
This vision and
understanding of the
vocation of the Sisters
of the Society of St. Pius
X highlights the sublime
mission to which these
souls have been called.
Could you give a word
of encouragement
to the young ladies
who are considering
a religious vocation?
A r c h bi s ho p L efe bv r e
defines the vocation of our
Sisters with these words:
And so you, helpers of
the priests, not only with
your hands but also with
your souls and minds—helpers of the priesthood, of Our
Lord Jesus Christ’s Sacrifice… for the extension of
His kingship, the extension
of his love—you should unite
yourselves in a very special
way to the Blessed Virgin
Mary. Like Her, close to Her
divine Son, you will share
His sufferings and also contribute to the redemption of
souls insofar as you are able
to do so.

ladies. And yet, the key role of
our Sisters in this crisis of the
Church, working as auxiliary
to the priesthood for the restoration of all things in Christ,
is of essential importance.
The spirituality and the
apostolate of our Sisters
deserve to be more widely
known and promoted. Young
ladies who still have enthusiasm for great causes, such as
the defense of the Church and
the salvation of souls, need to
be educated and made aware
of the grandeur of the vocation of our Sisters of the Society. They need to be enkindled with the fire of divine
love which has animated
these great saints like St. Joan
of Arc, St. Therese, St. Bernadette and so many others, that
they may, in their own turn,
make this worthy sacrifice by
generously offering their lives
under the patronage and in
the imitation of Our Lady of
Compassion!

Unfortunately, this beautiful vocation of our Sisters of
the Society is not sufficiently known and understood
among our faithful and young
71

The

ngelus

Support the Cause of Uncompromised Traditional Catholic Media!
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

Simply the Best Journal of Catholic Tradition Available!
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
$45.00
 1 year
$85.00
 2 years
$120.00
 3 years
Foreign Countries (inc. Canada & Mexico)
$65.00
 1 year
$125.00
 2 years
$180.00
 3 years
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)!

T he
L ast
Word

Fr. David Sherry
District Superior of Canada

Dear Reader,
The Catholic Church is condemned by
many. But, according to G.K. Chesterton, the
heretics witness that She is condemned for
all sorts of things that She Herself has condemned! Condemned for denying freedom,
we find that She Herself condemns those who
deny freedom. Spurned for being anti-sex, we
find that She fulminates against those who
destroy and denature it.
Not only that, She is condemned for opposing excesses. She is too spiritual (virginity?),
and She is also too material (ah, the riches of
the Vatican, the pomp of the papal court!) She
is too mixed up with the power of the State
(Catholic kings?), and She is not mixed-up
enough with the power of the State (Praemunire and Romish popery!).
But there is more: not only do we find that
the accusations against the Church are not
true, when we dig a little, we find that it is
precisely the opposite that is the truth. “The
Church is anti-science (Galileo).” But when
you investigate, you find that not only did the
Church not condemn Galileo’s science per se
(rather, his attempts to become the infallible
interpreter of scripture), She has always and
ever been the vindicator and protector of science, and wherever She brought the Faith,
reason flourished as never before.

Here’s a classic. “The Catholic Church is
anti-woman, and it is because of it that woman
has been oppressed. Thanks to the throwing
off of the Church, woman is at last free.” Not
only is this not true, it is precisely the opposite
that is the truth. Before the coming of Christ,
paganism treated woman not as a person,
but as a thing. Forced marriage, polygamy,
and divorce bear witness. Jesus Christ came
into the world and what happened? No more
polygamy, no more divorce, and no more
forced marriage. The wife is not one of many
within a man’s harem, she can’t be got rid of
because she’s out of date or a nag, and she is
free to say “I don’t.” And if you look at her
as a thing, you have sinned. The result of this
“oppression” by the Church? The liberation
and dignity of woman.
And now? Woman returns to slavery.
Divorce is back, polygamy is linear rather
than simultaneous, and rather than forcing
marriage, we’ve just got rid of it altogether. Wife, mother and queen of a home? She
should be out making money, like a good
slave. . .
Fr. David Sherry

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 Mission of Angelus Press
Angelus Press, 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.

Prometheus
Vatican II Is Prometheus in His Act of Larceny.
“The Second Vatican Council is Prometheus in his act of larceny. It was a maneuver
of all-too-human prudence carried out by a divinely constituted hierarchy, which
burned for men the incense that belongs to God alone. As in the parable of the
unfaithful steward, the Council cancelled man’s debts to God, promising salvation
to all; and in the worship of its New Mass gave man the better part.”
While the fruits of Vatican II have been evident for decades many Catholics still lack the
ability to articulate why the humanist principles that underlie Vatican II are so egregious.
This book summarizes the main tenets of Vatican II, explains the correct theological and
philosophical principles and exposes the fallacious thinking of the Council.
THIS BOOK WILL BE KNOWN AS THE DEFINITIVE EXPLANATION OF VATICAN II.

Topics defined, explained, and refuted by this book:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Inversion of the common good, anthropocentrism, Catholic humanism
Reinvention of authority, conciliar false optimism
Humanistic naturalism, conciliar naturalism
The Church and the Kingdom of God according to Lumen Gentium
The New Church, humanism, inclusivity, and innovation in the Council
How humanism eventually becomes Liberalism
Humanism needs subjectivism and autonomy of conscience
Church and world religions, the opening of the ecumenical pathways

273 pp. Softcover. STK# 8788. $19.95

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

Pocket Missal

A SUNDAY MISSAL THAT FITS IN YOUR POCKET!
This amazing Pocket Missal is incredibly complete for its tiny size. This new compact version of
the 1962 Traditional Sunday missal is the only one of its kind on the market that also includes
everything you need for daily prayer. Perfect for travel, children, and as a backup copy to keep in
the car—it will fit in a shirt or pants pocket, and any purse. Due to its compact nature this pocket
missal includes only what is absolutely necessary—which turned out to be a lot!

Propers of the Mass Not Included
CONTAINS: Morning Prayers • The Sign of the Cross • Morning Offering • Basic Prayers •
Apostles’ Creed • Confiteor • Act of Faith • Act of Hope • of Charity • of Contrition • Prayer to the
Guardian Angel • During the Day • Grace Before Meals • Grace After Meals • Angelus • Evening
Prayers • Act of Resignation • To the Holy Family • Night Oblation • For the Dying • For the Sick
• For Priests • Vestments • THE ORDINARY OF THE MASS • After Low Mass • Benediction of
the Most Blessed Sacrament • For Confession • Examination of Conscience • Act of Contrition •
For Holy Communion • After Communion • Act of Adoration • Act of Love • Stations of the Cross •
Before a Crucifix • Anima Christi • To the Blessed Virgin Mary • Consecration to the Sacred Heart
• Memorare • Salve Regina • To the Immaculate Virgin • Thirty Days’ • Litany of the Blessed Virgin •
Novena to the Sacred Heart of Jesus • Consecration to the Sacred Heart of Jesus • Spiritual Communion • Our Lady of Fatima Novena • Holy Rosary • Special Prayers • To St. Jude • To St. Anthony
• To St. Anne • Efficacious Prayer to the Holy Child Jesus, etc.
3” X 4”. 128 pp. STK# 8776. $5.95

www.angeluspress.org | 1-800-966-7337

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