Poetry Project III: "God's Grandeur" by Gerard Manley Hopkins

(This is the third installment of the occasional poetry series.  The others have been on Shelley's "Ozymandias" and Keats' "Ode on a Grecian Urn". -S.H.)  This also appeared as Eleison Comments LXXXVI in the Bishop's weekly column.

To celebrate the return of a native to his English homeland after 35 years of wandering abroad, let us take a brief look at a famous sonnet of the 19th century English Jesuit priest and poet, Fr. Gerard Manley Hopkins. Most suitably the sonnet commemorates the greatness of God. Let anyone who has never met with Hopkins prepare for a bumpy ride, but let him stay with it, because the ride is worth it. Here is "God's Grandeur":

The world is charged with the grandeur of God.
It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
And wears man's smudge and shares man's smell: the soil
Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

And for all this, nature is never spent;
There lives the dearest freshness deep down things;
And though the last lights off the black West went
Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.

Hopkins was born in 1844, the first of nine children of a High Anglican couple. A bright schoolboy, he obtained a scholarship to Balliol College, Oxford, where he became the star scholar in classical studies. Coming under the influence of John Henry Newman, famous Oxford convert to Catholicism 20 years earlier, he became Catholic one year before leaving Oxford, and at the age of 23 entered the Society of Jesus. In the course of his studies he came across the theology and philosophy of Duns Scotus which revived his interest in writing, and there rose up from within him a wholly personal vision of unchanging nature and English poetry. In 1877 he was ordained priest and did parish work in England. In 1884 he was moved to Dublin, where in 1889 he died of typhus, saying, "I am so happy".

Therefore Hopkins' life was wholly framed within the 19th century, hey-day of English Liberalism and Romanticism. However, that within him which made him convert to Catholicism and become a priest made his Romanticism quite different from that of his contemporaries, who could mostly hear only "the melancholy, long, withdrawing roar" of faith, of God, of hope. "God's Grandeur" is full of God, and full of hope.

Cast in classic sonnet form, the poem's first four lines tell of God's greatness flashing and oozing forth from all Creation. Then how (line 4) can modern man be paying him so little attention ? The answer (l.5-8) is that centuries of living for money ("trade") have cut man off from nature ("nor can foot feel"), and stripped both man and nature ("soil is bare") of God. Yet (l.9-14) God is still there, deep within natural things, as ever. Man may be putting out the lights of Western civilisation, still God is constantly recreating the world with brightness and warmth.

On a first reading, the originality of Hopkins' language and imagery may be off-putting. Who ever heard for instance of the Lord God being compared to tin-foil or to oil ? But inside Hopkins is a new wine which will not go into old bottles. To punch over the lifelessness of modern man he resorts to repetitions ("trod...trod...trod": "seared... bleared...smeared"), and in 12 of the 14 lines he uses old-fashioned alliterations ("smudge,smell","foot, feel",etc.).

As for the rhythm, instead of the classic English iambic pentameter (te-tum,te-tum,te-tum,te-tum,te-tum), we have a variety of feet and a varying number of beats to a line, from three (L9,13), to five (l.10), mostly four (eg l.1).

However, let nobody think Hopkins is indisciplined. He has chosen the Petrarchan sonnet form which allows of only four different rhymes for the 14 lines (here: --od, --oil, --ent and --ings), which for an English poet is quite demanding. And notice how carefully crafted is the last line of the sonnet, its climax:-- "World broods" matches "warm breast" and balances "bright wings" (wb, wb, bw), while the spondees (tum, tum) "World broods" and "bright wings" at each end frame two anapaests (te-te-tum) "with warm breast" and "and with ah!". Read the line slowly aloud, and see if you do not get a kick out of Fr. Hopkins!

Clearly he has no interest in being original for its own sake. Rather from within the liberal 19th century, decadent and growing tired, the convert-priest has a fresh vision of Creation and its Creator which calls for fresh language and rhythms. In truth, whoever recovers God will recover originality!

Could weary men but once more find their way
To God, how light and fresh would dawn the day!

Kyrie eleison.

London, England

Book Review: Letters from the Rector of St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary: The Ridgefield Letters, by Fr. Richard Williamson

Our first, and not our last, guest editorial/book review on True Restoration II, by the man who inspired me to blog about Traditionalist matters.  I am further blessed to call him a good friend.

Book Review by Nicholas Wansbutter, Esq.

Title: Letters From the Rector of St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, Volume I: The Ridgefield Letters
Author: Father Richard Williamson
Publisher: True Restoration Press
Excellence: 3.5 stars
Why: As a primary document, it shows, almost more than it tells, why we are traditionalists
Summary in a sentence: The perfect companion to Archbishop Lefebvre’s Open Letter to Confused Catholics, this collection of letters gives Catholics the answers they need regarding the S.S.P.X relations with Rome, and the crisis in the Church within the context of the events as they happened - a must have for any Catholic’s library.

When introducing people interested in tradition to the crisis in the Church and the traditionalist response to it, the mind obviously turns immediately to Archbishop Lefebvre’s Open Letter to Confused Catholics. Now with True Restoration Press’ publication of Fr. Williamson’s (as he then was) letters as Rector of St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in the relatively early days of the Society, one has the perfect companion text to give greater context and further proofs and confirmation of why we are doing what we are doing.

To people like myself who entered the fight late into the war, this is an especially important collection of letters. Starting with the rebuilding of the S.S.P.X apostolate in the U.S.A. after nine of its prominent priests departed for sedevacantism, and passing through the most important years of Pope John Paul II’s disastrous pontificate the letters are like a diary from the trenches witnessing and battling the “auto-demolition” of Holy Mother Church. The reader sees John Paul II’s first shocking steps down the œcumenical path with his visit to a Lutheran hall, his promulgation of the “monstrous scandal” of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, and the abomination of Assisi.

Most importantly, the letters to not merely play the role of cataloguing the Church’s liberal drift, but they give clear, concise explanations of the Catholic doctrine at stake and why these things are not Catholic. As such, they provide invaluable catechesis placed in the context of real events.

It is interesting to see the cautious hope at the beginning of John Paul II’s pontificate, and how the crisis had not progressed nearly as far then as it has now - sobering material for those who are tempted to think that the crisis is over now that Summorum Pontificum and the “re-incommunications” have seen the light of day. Indeed, one sees the jubilation at Bp. de Castro Mayer joining with Abp. Lefebvre, and the hope (since proved vain) that a second, and a third, and a fourth might also stand to defend tradition (letter #8). We also see hope (soon dashed) at the 1984 indult. Throughout this, Archbishop Lefebvre’s decision to consecrate bishops flows logically - though his torment at the necessity of it comes through Fr. Williamson’s commentaries.

This series of letters also shows, indirectly, how Father Williamson (as he then was) essentially saved the S.S.P.X from collapse in the United States after the defection of “the Nine”. Although His Lordship is too humble to take this credit himself, it is clear from the letters as one reads his description of the situation he’s inherited as interim district superior, through the growth of said district over the course of letters how a near catastrophe was turned into a great success. No doubt thanks to many others, but the growth of the seminary is apparent through Fr. Williamson’s reporting of how many ordinations and new vocations come and go at each year’s end. Also recurring throughout the letters we see the constant assaults of “the Nine” against the Society - both in the courts of law and in the Catholic press, which Fr. Williamson answers. Here he provides not only cogent arguments against sedevacantism, but explains the situation without rancour or malice.

The letters not only provide us with a live history of the S.S.P.X (not just in the U.S.A., but worldwide), and instruction on important doctrinal points, but it is all done in a charming, easy-to-read, and entertaining style. Fr. Williamson’s dry, British humour livens up many a letters, as does his liberal use of cultural allusions and quotes from Shakespeare, Matthew Arnold, A.E. Housman, and more. It serves as a bit of a cultural education in that respect as well. Above all, Fr. Williamson’s reason and logic is a breath of fresh air to the modern reader. Although not everyone will want to read this volume in one day (as I did), it is certainly possible without a hint of boredom.

The most beautiful letter is #45 wherein Fr. Williamson speaks of the death of his father, giving the reader a glimpse into the very human inner heart of the author - but again accompanied with some solid doctrine.

In sum, these letters are essential reading for every Catholic. Much easier to penetrate than Iota Unum, they present to the reader in bite-size chunks a survey of the Conciliar catastrophe as it picked up steam under John Paul II, counterbalanced with concise statements of Catholic doctrine. They place the reader in that crisis, so that there can be no doubt who was in the right - the two bishops, or the two thousand.  Vivat Christus Rex! 

Nicholas Wansbutter [email him] is a criminal lawyer operating his own firm in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada. He writes and blogs at Durendal and is the founder of the Collegium Scriptorum Catholicae, a traditionalist Catholic fiction writers’ group.

BBC Panel on the SSPX, Vatican II, and Bishop Williamson

I was a guest (for about 3 minutes) on Ernie Rea's afternoon BBC show Beyond Belief today. I credit Mr. Rea for conducting a fairly even-handed discussion about these matters, which the media have tried to turn into a circus in the last few weeks.

More importantly, Ernie took the time to talk about the root cause - why I preferred the Mass of All Time instead of just assuming it was some emotional attachment to Latin, etc. To him and his staff over at Beyond Belief, cheers!

You can download the podcast by clicking here and then by selecting the 16 Feb 2009 program labeled "Lefebvre".

Book Review: The Problems with the Prayers of the New Mass

Title: The Problems with the Prayers of the Modern Mass
Author: Anthony Cekada
Publisher: TAN Books
Excellence: 4 stars
Why: Short, sweet, and devastating.
Summary in a sentence: How substantial the changes really were, roasts the canard that the Novus Ordo is simply a vernacular translation of the Old Mass, and does so with extensive footnotes.

For those of you who are familiar with Fr. Anthony Cekada's work, you will notice he often is extensive in his footnotes. This is because often the jab at him is: "What does Fr. Cekada know, he's just some priest who got his training in Econe." To which Fr. Cekada replies, "They are right, and that's why I use a lot of footnotes - to show that it's not just me making stuff up - people should look up what I'm quoting."

The great thing about this book is that it can be read in an hour, but gives enough food for thought for days. At this point, I've read so many books on the New Mass vs. Tridentine Mass controversy that I thought, what more could I learn - and this short booklet showed me I still had a whole lot more to understand.

From the Introduction:

"Their (traditionalists) adherence to the old Mass and rejection of the New Mass is founded on the differences in content between the two rites. Traditionalists, in one way or another, view the prayers and ceremonies of the new rite, even when conducted in Latin, as a threat to Catholic tradition and Catholic doctrine."

Meaning, it's not just Latin and incense...

Father then explains how the "Committee for Implementing the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy" (in the spirit of 1789, we could call this the "Committee of Liturgical Safety") or Consilium, as it is better known, was established as a workaround for the more intransigent fogies at the Sacred Congregation of Rites. "Establishing a new entity to propose liturgical changes, therefore, achieved the proverbial end-run around a well-entrenched opposition" (7).

Father cites a Fr. Guy Oury, who stated "If someone were to devote his time to the work of making a line-by-line comparison, he would find in the Missal of Paul VI three-quarters if not six-ninths of the content of the original Missal of St. Pius V" (6). Without addressing the howls that such a statement would receive among the faithful of today who do not in any way represent the sheep that baaaed when this was published in 1975, Father calmly states: "The statistics, however, tell a different story: The Traditional Missal contains 1182 orations. About 760 of those were dropped entirely. Of the approximately 36% which remained, the revisers altered over half of them before introducing them into the new Missal" (9).

Father Cekada then goes on to deal with 6 areas of Catholic doctrine that have been devastated (understatement) by the New Missal, viz.

"Negative theology"
Detachment from the world
Prayers for the departed
Ecumenism
The merits of the Saints
Miracles

My goal here is not to reprint Father's book, but to encourage you to read it, so as much as I'd like to quote more, I will just quote a single example that Father gives in each of these sections.

"Negative theology"

What is this? Basically anything that talks about "bad" stuff, like hell, sin, human weakness, the world, the flesh, the devil, you know, that outdated stuff.

Collect for the Third Sunday after Pentecost was changed to the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time and the last part was changed from:

"we may so pass through the good things of time that we may not lose the good things of eternity."

to:

"we may now so use transient things that we may cling to those things which endure."

Father notes: "The allusion to the possibility of damnation - the loss of heaven through the misuse of temporal things - has disappeared. In its place there is expressed a desire to cling to things which endure,' a vague, though infinitely 'more positive' notion" (14).

Detachment from the world

Those of us familiar with Vatican II Newspeak will recognize this jarring change for the Collect of St. Peter Damian

Old text: "that by a contempt of earthly things, we may obtain everlasting joys."

Short, sweet, Catholic, right?

New text: "that putting nothing before Christ and always intent on the service of Thy Church we may be led to the joys of eternal light."

Prayers for the Departed

"One of the most striking changes in the post-Conciliar liturgy involved the rites and prayers for the dead. White vestments replaced black; Alleluia replaced Eternal Rest Grant unto Them, and the typical funeral, in America at least, was turned into something akin to a canonization ceremony" (20).

Ecumenism

This is one of the most indicting changes, and looks deep into the soul-less heart of Vatican II.

The Collect for the Propagation of the Faith, now changed to the "Evangelization of Peoples" reads:

Old text: "Send, we beseech Thee, laborers into Thy harvest and grant them grace with all boldness to speak Thy word; so that Thy word may run and be glorified, and all nations may know Thee, the only God, and Him whom Thou has sent, Jesus Christ Thy Son, Our Lord."

Again, perfect. Catholic. Clearly. But not good enough for Consilium. The bulldozed text reads:

"Look upon Thy great harvest, and graciuosly send laborers therein, so that the Gospel may be preached to every creature adn that Thy people, gathered by the word of life, and strengthened by the power of the sacraments, may advance in the way of salvation and charity."

What? If you are lost, you're not alone. Fr. Cekada responds: "The goal of the missionary's apostolate has been changed...in the new collect, it appears to be merely 'preaching the Gospel'" (23). In other words, why mention Jesus? He's not really "good" for "ecumenism."

The Merits of the Saints

Old text for the Collect of St. Gertrude the Great:

"by her merits and intercession do Thou mercifully wash away from our hearts the stains of sin and grant that we may rejoice with her in heavenly fellowship."

New text:

"by her intercession do Thou mercifully enlighten the darkness of ourhearts that we may joyfully experience Thee working and present within us."

"The whole perspective of the prayer was altered: 'enlightenment' and 'joy' are part of contemporary man's experience; 'merits,' the 'stains of sin' and 'heavenly fellowship' are not, so these latter concepts have disappeared" (26).

Miracles

"The oration for the feast of Our Lady of Lourdes no longer mentions her apparition, but then the new orations for the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary no longer bother to mention her Rosary, either" (28).

I can provide no better conclusion than Father's last 2 paragraphs of the book.

Finally, there is the proverbial man in the pew - the average Catholic. He is oblivious to the continuing controversies between neo-Modernists and the conservatives over what is and what is not Catholic teaching, he reads little about the faith and he more than likely received his last formal religious instruction in high school. The only formation he now receives in his faith is what he hears and sees druing the 45 minutes or so that he spends in church on Sunday. For him, "The law of prayer," practically speaking, is his only "law of belief."

For him (as Father Braga predicted), the contents of the New Missal will indeed "have a transforming effect on catechesis." If hell, the human soul or the wickedness of sin count for little in the new ligurgy, they will in turn count but little for the man in the pew. And if this man - contemporary "Catholic" man - no longer believes in or is even aware of these and other parts of the Church's teaching, it will be in no small measure due to the law of unbelief in teh orations of the new Missal of Paul VI.
(31)

I highly recommend this short succinct read. It is great to hand out to Novus Ordo and Indult friends and TAN offers bulk pricing.

Book Review: The Mouth of the Lion

Title: The Mouth of the Lion: Bishop de Castro Mayer and the Last Catholic Diocese
Author: David Allen White
Publisher: Angelus Press
Excellence: 4 stars
Why: Another Dr. White story of a hero
Summary in a sentence: Proof that in "Portugal" (Brazil) the dogma of the faith was always kept. :-)

I only recently finished Dr. White's book on the Archbishop, and I have to admit, this one had been sitting on my bookshelf for a couple years. Why? It's one of those books you tell yourself you "have to read" but there is no urgency behind it. I found my urgency after reading Dr. White's Horn of the Unicorn.

I called him recently, and I thanked him for another excellent book, but further discussed with him the fact that due to the defection of Campos, the book now had an "unhappy" ending. He agreed and noted that future publications of the book would have something like his open letter to the priests of Campos in the front of it. I called Angelus Press and they told me that they have less than 150 copies left in print. My advice? Get them while they are still left!

The book is simply, a tour de force. It's really in two principal parts - Bishop de Castro Mayer's formation and resistance, and then how the Conciliar Church systematically expelled and defamed priests and faithful attached to the Catholic Faith.

The book's first part confirms something that I have often said, which is that 1789 in the Church didn't happen overnight. It was something long in the planning. And even as a young bishop, many years before the Council, Bishop de Castro Mayer, like Archbishop Lefebvre, was singled out as one of those "integrists."

In the early years His Excellency worked closely with Plinio Correa de Oliveira, the eventual founder of TFP. Archbishop Lefebvre would say that "TFP saved Brazil from Communism" but as time went on Bishop de Castro Mayer had to distance himself from the organization due to strange tendencies and stories which he had investigated to his satisfaction. He even advised Catholics to steer clear of the organization. Dr. White speaks about some of these tendencies in Part III, Chapter 7 of the book. To simply name a few of them without context here seems out of place, and I would simply say that Bishop de Castro Mayer worked too closely with Plinio for too many years and was too just a man to arbitrarily dismiss a former colleague and his organization. If the Bishop warned Catholics away from TFP, it was not with an idle tongue.

Active in Catholic Action, Dom Antonio (as they refer to their Bishops in Brazil) lived a simple life as a bishop and was never idle. This was exemplified in his pastoral letters, one of which bears, in text and commentary, extended treatment:

"...It is important, then, in the highest degree, to launch in unity and with discipline all the Catholic forces, all the peaceful army of Christ the King to win over all the people who groan in the shadows of death, who are deceived by heresy or by schism, by the superstitions of old Gentility, or by the many idols of modern neo-paganism." (from a pastoral letter)

He goes on to describe the state of too many modern Catholics who describe themselves as devoted children of the church, attend Mass, know their catechisms and say their prayers, but whose entire lives are saturated with false liberal ideas, such as separation of Church and State, or liberty, equality and religious freedom, all the heresies in which history and government and schools and media have steeped us...The spirit that animates their behavior is not Catholic; their Catholic behavior is simple habit, like the brushing of their teeth...On one side, they acquiesce to the seductions of the liberal world that surrounds them; on the other side they maintain enough Catholic habits to convince themselves that they still guard and uphold the "pure, invariable, inextinguishable brilliance of Catholic doctrine"... (Dr White)
67

These sorts of words, combined with the solid formation he had already received, made for an implacable opponent of Modernism. In another place, he says: "The devil instills then, to arrive at his end, a spirit of confusion which seduces the souls to profess error cleverly hidden in the appearances of Truth. We cannot look for, in this fight, that the adversary will give out statements clearly contrary to Truths already defined" (69).

The book also recalls an ally of Tradition, Bishop Sigaud, who also played a great role at the Council with the Coetus Fathers. Bishop Tissier de Mallerais' Marcel Lefebvre (which we hope to review here in good time) provides in its middle section, a good companion to Dr. White's treatment of the Council through Bishop de Castro Mayer's eyes. And for those of us, who have come to rely on accounts like Fr. Ralph Wiltgen's Rhine flows into the Tiber as reference books, it is particularly telling to see narrative accounts, like those in the now dual biographies of the Archbishop as well as this work. These narrative accounts are often studies in an enormous impending disaster - at first slowly in the Preparatory Commissions, most notably in the Bea/Ottaviani confrontation - all the way to the utter treachery perpetrated in the pidgeonholing of a schema condemning communism - a cowardice that in no way paid tribute to names like Mindszenty, Stepinac, Slipyi, and the countless other Catholics struggling to be faithful under an iron fist and curtain.

The Council finished, the doors to the world open, and Tradition thrown out those open doors on her ear, Dr. White remarks:

As most of the fathers of the modern-day Church were engaging in an exuberant fling of hyper-delight over the possibility of "renewal," leaping and spinning and reeling with the intoxication of the heady fumes of release that always follow the easing of the bonds and restraints of order, this bishop sat on the sidelines, soberly observing, his head full of worry, his heart full of sorrow...
87

He wrote to Rome and stated openly and unequivocally that he would "not accept" the new Mass..."The pope allows the new Mass; I will not forbid you to say it; follow your conscience."
93

Then Dr. White puts in words one of the attitudes that made the precipitous post Vatican II collapse possible:

An intellectual laziness that led to a blind priest-dependence and persisted for too long made the devastation of recent years possible...This submission without thought, without reason, without sense, may have worked during the years the Church had her reason and sense, but when the zanies took over and ran rampant, everything went haywire.
96-97

It is not within the scope of this review to reprint the highly edifying (and hard-hitting) words of Bishop de Castro Mayer, but here is an excerpt of a response to a question from Paul VI posed through the nuncio, viz. "What problems do you have with my pontificate? If you have difficulties, tell me frankly and directly."

Frankly and directly, His Excellency stated, among other things:

The length of the years has formed in my spirit the conviction that official acts of Your Holiness do not conform with those of the Pontiffs that went before, though with all my soul I wanted to see them as the same.
101 (emphasis in original)

In typical fashion of the usurpers of the Vatican that have ruled since the Council, the letter was only acknowledged as received. No response was given.

The response was even less to a letter authored to John Paul II (of supremely infelicitous memory). An excerpt contained:

With all respect, I dare to say to Your Holiness that this sickness can be ended at once through pontifical pronouncements relating to the above matters, and, in general, on the various matters of Doctrines and Morals which emphasize, in an unequivocal manner, their uniformity with the teachings of the two-thousand-year-old Church of Christ.
150

Not even an acknowledgement of receipt was obtained.

Dr. White also discusses His Excellency's heroic steadfastness with the Archbishop at the 1988 consecrations. Dr. White casts their stance thus:

...the presence and actions of Bishop de Castro Mayer gave these consecrations greater grave significance in the history of the Church in our time...The missionary bishop and the partriarchal bishop, the archbishop who traveled the globe to foster the Fatih world-wide and the prelate who remained at home to preserve the Faith in the one diocese assigned to his care, these two "faithful witnesses" joined together at this moment to present to the world two faces of the Faith - the apostolic and the pastoral.
243

The book then turns to the expulsions of the priests and faithful from the churches which in many cases they had built with their own hands. Truly, the Church had gone "into the cocoon of Vatican II a bright butterfly and transformed itself into a peculiarly ungainly hairy caterpillar" (162).

The pattern was the same everywhere, Bishop Navarro, the hired gun of the Conciliar Church, a man who allowed "obedience" to trump Faith and Doctrine, systematically ejected every single priest in the Diocese who refused to say the Novus Ordo. The faithful, unlike many faithful in this country, were properly catechized and followed their priest into "exile." They opened their homes, their garages, their lay-owned wayside chapels, and began the work of restoring. Again. Not with much wealth, for Campos is poor, but with joyful hearts and a steadfast faith.

Alas, the book in its present form has a happy ending. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais performed an episcopal consecration for a selected priest (Bishop Licinio Rangel, RIP) of the Campos "Priestly Association of St. John Vianney" as the exiled priests had incorporated themselves. It even tells of the articulate and firm nature of one of the most prominent priests, a Padre Rifan - which we have come to know as the great accuser of Traditionalists (see here for our "seven deadly sins") and a man, who given the depth of research in Dr. White's book, is found to be an even bigger traitor to the cause of Tradition. Yet we know that there is not a happy ending in Campos now.

Campos was an example of a faith that never hesitated. We hesitate to write more, as the alliance with the neo-Vatican authorities is still new. But as we can see in the text below a man most unworthy of Bishop de Castro Mayer utters (through a spokesman):

Now, to refuse continually and explicitly to participate in every and any Mass in the rite celebrated by the Pope and by all the bishops of the Church while judging this rite, in itself, incompatible with the Faith, or sinful, represents a formal refusal of communion with the Pope and with the Catholic episcopate.

The objective fact cannot be denied that the rite of Paul VI is the official rite of the Latin Church, celebrated by the Pope and by all the Catholic episcopate.

That sorrowful gaze on the face of Bishop de Castro Mayer that Dr. White alluded to earlier in the book upon the conclusion of the Council must now, absent of the beatitude he certainly enjoys, in a certain way, countenance the face of the man who gave his priesthood to such a betrayer (Bishop Rifan) of the very essence of the Catholic priesthood. He has abandoned support for the Mass of all Time for the support of the Novus Ordo Missae - a ceremony which in its spirit departs from the Catholic theology of the Mass as formulated at Trent.

A more fitting epitaph for this lion of the faith would not come from a man who received the priesthood from him, but from an enemy:

"Dom Antonio is a symbol of a solid man who knew how to fight. We did not agree with him, but we admired him."
247

And from the Acknowledgements to The Horn of the Unicorn:

"Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer are the two great saints of the modern Church. Once this catastrophe ends they will be instantly canonized."

Requiescat in pace, Dom Antonio.

Don't, as I did, wait to read this book. It will reaffirm your faith and your belief in our present struggle just as much as reading a book on doctrine or the life of a saint. Indeed, it is, in a way, a life of a saint.

Note: There is a very young Fr. Williamson in the background of the picture at the top...

Book Review: Horn of the Unicorn

Title: The Horn of the Unicorn
Author: Dr. David Allen White
Publisher: Angelus Press
Why: Written in an extremely readable style
Excellence: 4 stars
Summary in a Sentence: A mosaic of the life of a man to which every Traditional Catholic is deeply indebted.

When something like Dr. White’s book on the Archbishop comes along, a reviewer finds himself reading a book without stopping, being left with thoughts and ponderings for days, and in fear of writing a review because it may not do the book proper justice.

But with the release of this book imminent, I feel constrained to force myself into my desk and with the manuscript at hand, I will do my best to not only highlight the most salient parts of this work, but also to encourage you to pick it up and read it yourself.

The Horn of the Unicorn is a worthy follow up to Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais’ Marcel Lefebvre. While not as comprehensive as the latter, it pays tribute not only to Dr. White’s highly allusive literary mind, but also to Archbishop Lefebvre's highly Catholic thinking and way of life.

The book is divided into sections and while switching between third and first person accounts, one almost feels that you are watching the crisis in the Church unfold through the Archbishop’s eyes. It is also written in "historical sound bites," divided by the Archbishop's coat of arms. One section may have a Scriptural quote, another a quote from the Archbishop, another a narrative, another an anecdote. It makes for easy start-and-stop reading.

Part One

One cannot understand Archbishop Lefebvre without understanding his family. “From the year 1738, the Lefebvre family had given nearly fifty of its members to Mother Church, including a cardinal, a few bishops, and many priests and religious” (p. 11).

Of the Archbishop’s saintly mother, Dr. White notes: “her friends noted her love of conversation, not centered on chatter about fellow students or local gossip, but, rather, focused on her fascination for ideas” (p. 15).

As for the Lefebvre family’s daily routine:

Every morning the Lefebvre's rose early to prepare for the five-minute walk to the parish church; every morning when possible Rene and Gabrielle assisted at Mass. On those mornings when worldly tasks intervened, they received Communion from the parish priest who gave Communion every fifteen minutes from 5:15 a.m. until 9:00 a.m. to accommodate the large number of souls who had to be at work and did not have time to attend Mass. This was a custom of the place and time.
22

Hence, we can see the roots of the Archbishop’s love of the Church – grown within the family stock, nourished by his mother, and fortified by the Divine Savior in daily visits.

But that love was not some academic ideal locked away in an ivory tower. Even while young, Marcel understood that Catholicism was not simply “out there” but that it began at home – and without being rooted in home it would fail:

Young Rene, the eldest son, had a penchant for cards, perhaps a legacy from his paternal grandfather. Having failed one day to find a partner among his friends and unwilling to settle for solitaire, Rene asked his younger brother Marcel to play with him. Marcel refused. Rene, as elder brother, played his “trump card” and ordered the younger brother to the table. An elder brother possesses authority over a younger sibling. Marcel obeyed.
24

Beyond simple passive obedience, even the young Marcel was animated to do more than simply “avoid evil.”

When still a young child, the eldest Lefebvre son, Rene, sat down one day and wrote a letter to the reigning pontiff, Pope Pius X. He respectfully requested that the Pope allow children to begin receiving the Blessed Sacrament at a younger age. Rene had full knowledge of the sacrament, and though still a young boy, longed to receive his Lord and Savior in the Holy Eucharist.
25

Can a younger brother who did not hesitate to obey simply a command to play cards not be vivified by such a spirit from an elder brother? Not likely.

Indeed, he was to follow his elder brother into the priesthood. It was said of Marcel that he was “a seminarian before the fact” (41).

Though initially unsure about his call, the words of his Trappist uncle confirmed his vocation: “You will be a priest…you must be a priest” (42).

Part Two

This chapter introduces the reader, if he doesn’t know the name already, to the august personage of Fr. Henri Le Floch, Archbishop Lefebvre’s principal mentor at the French Seminary in Rome. In the words of the Archbishop:

Fr. Le Floch and the professors taught us how we should view current events, exposed errors to us – liberalism, modernism, and so many others of which we were not aware – and taught us how we must search for the truth in the papal encyclicals, particularly those of St. Pius X, Leo XIII, and all the popes who had preceded them.
46

Dr. White points out:

When, half a century later, this same man would hear popes making statements that differed from the uniform ideas that had been defined by so many earlier popes over so many previous centuries, the revelatory understanding from his great teacher from his formative seminary years must have set off alarm bells. He saw the smoke and smelled the fire; no wonder he formed a bucket brigade.
47

Yet we find out that in this time Fr. Le Floch is dismissed from the Seminary by rumor-mongering. How was such a man dismissed? Because the crisis in the Church did not begin in 1960 with Vatican II, as some naïve persons would have you believe. When Pius X (of immortal memory) ascended to the throne of Peter, he already knew the Modernists were in high places. Indeed, at this time, in the late 1920s, after the Saint’s death, the Modernists were starting to act more openly. Dom Schuster, beatified in 1996, was responsible for performing an investigation before the dismissal of Fr. Le Floch. He noted “Fr. Le Floch’s deep faith, his exceptional concern for his students, and his profound, positive influence on them” (49). No matter, he (like Cardinal Billot from the Gregorian) was dismissed. We can only guess that similar words were in Cardinal Gagnon’s 1986 report on his Apostolic Visitation to the Society. The parallel is almost overwhelming. But in a way, it was fitting that the student undergo the same sufferings as the teacher, viz. being dismissed by a Church he loved, because of enemies who operated by tactics of rumor, lies, and deceit. As a young seminarian, Marcel Lefebvre was schooled in how the Modernists operated, and when he found himself all alone defending the past teachings of the Church, he knew we could not cede the field to the Modernists under “obedience” for all would have been lost. But, onwards.

The rest of this part sees the Archbishop as a newly minted priest returning to his parish at Lille and beginning to help the Cure of his parish. He was noted for his great charity and zeal and everyone around him, even the unbelievers and non-practicing Catholics, were edified. Yet, the quiet parish life, though it suited him to the bone, was not to be his. His brother Rene, working with the Holy Ghost Fathers in Gabon, Africa, kept calling through his letters for Marcel to follow. Dr. White remarks that the obedience shown in such a small matter of cards cannot be disregarded as part of young Fr. Lefebvre’s decision to join Rene’s work. He left his family, not knowing it would be the last time he would see his mother, who was undergoing a crucifixion of bodily sufferings, on this earth.

Cream rises to the top, and Fr. Lefebvre was identified as a seminary professor. He worked to near breaking, as did many missionaries of that day. Indeed, the average life expectancy for missionaries of that time was 28-30, not simply due to the challenging African climate, but also because of the manifold diseases that roamed the dark continent (and alas, still do). One night, “In agony, he said, ‘I can’t stand it any more, I believe it is very serious. One cannot know, but I may die. Please hear my confession’” (66). Deo gratias, the Archbishop did not leave us that night, but it is illustrative of his spirit – to suffer in silence until it was absolutely unbearable. This was a mark of the Archbishop’s character.

As Part Two closes, we witness Fr. Lefebvre, surrounded by some happy children from his mission parish, reading a letter ordering him back to France to another seminary post. We end Part Two with another of Dr. White’s “historical sound bites”:

With sorrow, Fr. Lefebvre prepared to return to a war-torn Europe, a shattered continent that in half a dozen years had seen millions of souls ground up in the unrelenting jaws of war. One of the victims, dead in the concentration camp of Sonnenburg in 1944 was his father, Rene Lefebvre.
77

So much for Rocco Palmo and his vaunted (and flaunted) "SSPX anti-semitism." I wonder if Rocco knows that the father of the Society’s founder suffered the last years of his life in a Nazi concentration camp and also died there. Probably not.

Part Three

The death of Rene Lefebvre ends Part Two, but in the beginning of Part Three we can read his words to his children:

You know that I die a French Catholic, monarchist, because for me, it is only by the re-establishment of Christina monarchies that Europe and the world will be able once again to find stability and true peace. If I should die here, it is the Good Lord who will have decided in this fashion and without a retreat to prepare myself for heaven that my purgatory should have begun here.
81

This was the Lefebvre family spirit that exemplified the words on the Archbishop’s coat of arms: Credidimus caritati (We have believed in charity).

Fr. Lefebvre continued his duties of forming priests, now in his native France, with his body recovering from the hard years in Africa. Simply obedient to what the Church up to this time had asked him, viz. The task of forming priests, he was quite surprised when he received a call which informed of his designation as Apostolic Vicar of Dakar – a post that necessarily carried an Episcopal consecration.

Dr. White communicated the Archbishop’s thoughts thusly:

Fr. Lefebvre’s response to this news was not simple resignation, but fear. The priest knew fear. He had some knowledge of missionary work; he had learned to teach seminarians and to run a seminary; he had dealt with simple souls in parish life. To be a bishop means to be elevated beyond common tasks or simple duties. Responsibilities and burdens multiply; in a very real sense you become separated from those around you.
85

The Archbishop had taken the Oath against Modernism when ordained a subdeacon, deacon, and priest. Now, as a bishop, he would affirm it once more.

Thousands and thousands took the oath. As the years passed, more and more forgot or ignored it, or allowed their own consciences to redefine its meaning and their obligation. Two bishops kept the oath to the letter for their entire lives, one the Apostolic Vicar of Dakar, the other a bishop in Brazil.

In 1967 the oath was suppressed.
87

It should not be not be thought that I am quoting the only important parts of Dr. White’s momentous, instantly classic, work. The reality is that the tapestry he weaves cannot fairly be commented on – the intimacies of home life, his travails in Africa, the anecdotes of his episcopacy, etc. They must be read in their context, and in highlighting what I do, I hope to provide a framework wherein one might see the gaps and readily desire to fill them by reading more.

Good men never stay in one promotion for long. Bishop Lefebvre was soon appointed Apostolic Delegate for all of French-speaking Africa. This made him roughly equivalent to a papal nuncio, and such high elevation without greasing the wheels of politics in Rome would be noted in years to come.

The Archbishop was too much of a free agent for the liking of many in the Roman Curia. Too few in red and lavender robes with episcopally ringed hands had pushed the papers or put their seal of approval on this nobody’s appointment. This man must be an intruder, an upstart, an independent agent. Keep a close eye on him.
99

For now, his duties as listed showed the complete faith, trust, and hope that the Holy Father, in the person of Pius XII (of happy memory), placed in His Excellency.

…You will have forty-six dioceses to visit…see if the number of dioceses should be increased or decreased, if new bishops should be made…When a bishop resigns or dies, you will be in charge of submitting names to Rome for appointment of other bishops, etc. That means there will be dossiers to prepare. You will have to establish contact with the superiors general of the religious congregations, as the nominations of bishops also pertains to them, for they must tell you which of their subjects would be most apt for the episcopacy, etc.
92

How did the new Apostolic Delegate face such tasks?

With “great charity and kindness…natural politeness…radiant serenity. Calm of soul and grace of heart radiated from him and touched all who came to know him….Never impatient, never condescending, neither irksome nor quarrelsome, always upright and just, compassionate and stalwart."
95

Did such gentleness of heart make him a pushover? Indeed not. When faced with an unacceptable collaboration with Islam, in the guise of buying Muslim talismans or under pressure to convert away from Catholicism, Archbishop Lefebvre reacted in a Catholic manner. He put the region under interdict until the situation was resolved. “A warm, benevolent Archbishop wields a crosier that bites when it strikes in defense of the flock.”

96

But the unmitigated practice of Catholic bishophry was not to be allowed much longer. The wind changed, and a man who asked to receive his red hat from the hand of a Socialist and whose file in the Holy Office was marked “suspected of Modernism” became the Pope and got an “inspiration” to have the first pastoral council in the 2000 year history of the Catholic Church.

John XXIII also succumbed to the spirit of collegiality before it was even named. The French bishops, upset that Archbishop Lefebvre would now be returning to France because the Pope had relieved him of his duties as Apostolic Delegate, made sure that despite his rank as Archbishop, he would not be given an archdiocese and would not be allowed to participate in the French Assembly (read: infant growth of the infelicitous current Bishops’ Conferences).

Here our happy story takes us down the the unhappy and well-trod path that we, unfortunately, know too well because of the scholarship of the last 20 years. Dr. White manages to cover in an effective and narrative style, the sequence of events that have been well chronicled in Fr. Wiltgen’s Rhine flows into the Tiber, Michael Davies’ Pope John’s Council, Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre, and The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty, Romano Amerio’s seminal Iota Unum, Atila Sinke Guimaraes’s monumental In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, and the Archbishop’s own I accuse the Council! and A Bishop Speaks. Those who have read those works will find nothing new, but will not be bored with Dr. White’s own retelling of the facts. Indeed, we seem to have entered the act in the tragedy with the most unbelievable events, and Dr. White’s literary imagination does not lose the opportunity to actually and realistically walk through the idea of Paul VI as Hamlet or John Paul II as Lear.

Part Four

The Council was now closed. Men like Arcbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer became irrelevant as the Church decided on a new priesthood, a new Mass, a new approach to the world. What was the point of a sacrifical priesthood if the Mass was now the “Lord’s Supper,” as in a definition approved by Paul VI?

What was whispered about Fr. Le Floch (integrist, ultramontanist, rigorist, jansenist) was always whispered about the Archbishop. But now the long knives came out, vindicated by the unction of the “Spirit of the Council.”

This part, which includes many wonderful pictures of the Archbishop and his work, closes with an effective expulsion of his person as Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers. Aggiornamento had now become not just a clarion call from the Vatican, but was a freight train bearing down on those who would dare to “transmit what they had received.” This was not the first time, nor would it be the last, when "authority" would "expel" such a lion of Tradition.

One of Dr. White's prescient phrases about the character of the Archbishop also occurs here: "His basic decency and sense of fair play did him in" (151). Indeed, this happened also some time later at his kangaroo "trial" with 3 Cardinals in Rome.

Some of his last words as Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers occurred here:

This spirit of democratization of the Church's teaching is a mortal danger if not for the Church, which God will protect forever, but for millions of helpless and poisoned souls to whose aid no Doctor comes.
155

Part Five

Now, the "drama of Econe," as it would be called for many years afterwards, truly began. It began as a remark from the Archbishop to a close friend, Fr. O'Carroll: "If I have to leave the congregation I shall found a traditionalist seminary and, within three years, I shall have one hundred and fifty students" (159). Given the destruction and hopelessness of the time, one might, if not aware of the Archbishop's sense of reality, think such remarks histrionic. But, indeed, they were a prophecy. And try as the modern Church might to stamp it out, as in the obfuscation of the Third Secret, presided over by the current Pope, some Catholics still believe in prophecies. Indeed, was it not a prophecy that a Babe would be born in Bethlehem?

Dr. White makes the point:

In 1965, there were 48,992 seminarians in the United States preparing for the priesthood; in 2002, there were 4,719 preparing to become cheerleaders for the "Civilization of Love." This was the New Pentecost"?
161

St. John Vianney follows:

If you want to destroy religion, you begin by attacking the priest, because where there is no more priest, there is no more sacrifice, and where there is no more sacrifice, there is no longer religion. Leave a parish twenty years without a priest and they will be worshipping the animals.
162

Econe was providentially given to the Archbishop, who went through the proper ecclesiastical channels to found the Society, which was providentially erected by the Bishop of the diocese, and Econe, despite denouncements from the bishops as a "wildcat seminary," began to flourish.

Dr. White reprints in this part a few speeches to the faithful that still today sound like the milk and honey of the true Faith that so clearly must have resounded to the parched faithful of just 40 years ago, just out of the destruction that was Vatican II. And they knew the voice of a true shepherd.

The designated shepherd of Christ, Paul VI, of unhappy memory, was too busy making statements like "The Second Vatican Council has full authority. It is even more important than the Council of Nicea" (178).

Dr. White calls this statement "incredible." I actually searched my thesaurus to find a more adequate word, because it's beyond astonishing. To put it informally, it's flabbergasting. Nicea, which affirmed the Divinity of Our Lord, less important than Vatican II, which did nothing but let in destruction? Yes, the smoke of Satan, introduced by Paul VI and Vatican II, had truly entered the Church.

Now the story follows the course, familiar to some, not known to others, of the Society's "suppression," the Archbishop's "suspension" (to which he cheerfully replied that he did not mind being suspended from saying the New Mass, as he did not say it), and calumnies about Econe spread worldwide.

The sequence in this part of the Archbishop's final audience with Paul VI is not only one of the most memorable and telling parts of this book and the drama of Rome and Econe, it is told in a narrative way that one reading it might truly feel present at that exchange. Paul VI, with a "tormented and feverish face" (210) and The Archbishop "overcome, put(ting) his head in his hands" (211) when the Pope asked (among other wild and crazy accusations) whether he should resign and give his position to the Archbishop, and when Archbishop Lefebvre realized that this audience was not about doctrine and ideas, it was about "hurt feelings" (211).

Part Six

This part chronicles the time after this audience to the controversial consecration of 1988. Bishop de Castro Mayer, against his doctor's advice, flew to Econe to demonstrate his unity with the cause of Tradition, the then-Cardinal Ratzinger worked day and night to bind the Archbishop and the Society to the millstone of Vatican II, and the whole Catholic world watched in astonishment as the word "excommunication," withheld from such "new luminaries" like Congar, Curran, and Kung, was now put on this Lion of the Faith, and Bishop de Castro Mayer, and the four new bishops.

These events, more recent, are perhaps better known, but Dr. White gives them even deeper context in the words of the Archbishop. In response to the question of whether he was in schism, we find the Catholic response of the Archbishop:

Why is breaking with the Pope an act of schism? Because where the Pope is, there is the Catholic Church. It really means withdrawing from the Catholic Church. Now the Catholic Church is a mystic reality that exists, not only on the earth's surface, but also in time and eternity. For the Pope to represent the Church and be her image, he must be united to her, not only in space, but also in time, the church being essentially a living tradition.

In the same measure that a pope should withdraw from this tradition, he would become schismatic, would withdraw from the church. Theologians like St. Bellarmine, Cajetan, Cardinal Journet, and many others have studied this eventuality. It is, therefore, not something inconceivable...

Limiting ourselves to internal and external criticism of Vatican II, that is, analyzing the Council's texts and studying its affinities and effects - we believe we may state that, turning its back on tradition, breaking with the Church of the past, it is a schismatic council...
217-218

Limits of space and painfulness of reality constrain our discussion of the Apostasy-Event of Assisi 1986. Indeed, "the past judges the present. God will judge in the future," (220) as the Archbishop said.

Part Seven

June 1988 had many consequences. One of them was the abandonment of Tradition for the label of legitimacy by Dom Gerard Calvet of Le Barroux.

Those close to the Archbishop said that when word reached him that Dom Gerard had broken his word, they witnessed the Archbishop weep, so deep was his disappointment and dismay. (They had never seen him weep but that once; they only saw him angry once, when some seminarians mocked a modernist priest, and only saw him run once, when he tried to catch Jean Madiran, who was boarding a train).
283

This part, along with the epilogue, ties together all the previous parts in a way that not only satisfies, but throws a light out through the darkness in the spirit of the Archbishop, one of our last links with a Church, a faith, and a priestly formation that, without him, might have been lost forever.

Dr. White is to be commended for writing a classic. This book is a must read for anyone who is interested in the traditional Catholic movement. It would be of interest to those who do not attend chapels serviced by the priest of the Society of St. Pius X so that they may read of the trials of a man, who, whether they want to admit it or not, is the only reason that the Latin Mass and the Traditional Faith still exist in the Church today.

From all of us who know that to be true:

Gratias tibi agimus, et requiescat in pace, Marcel Lefebvre.

Book Review: Marcel Lefebvre

Title: Marcel Lefebvre, the Biography
Author: H.E. Bp. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais
Publisher: Angelus Press
Excellence: 4 stars
Why: Without sparing detail, H.E. covers all the possible ground for a possible canonical investigation in the future regarding Archbishop Lefebvre
Summary in a sentence: The comprehensive, answer-all-questions, guide to the Archbishop and founding of the Society.

I've put off this review for some time simply because this book is daunting. Weighing in at 670 pages in the English edition, I have met countless of Society faithful who have been going to SSPX chapels far longer than I have who simply have not picked this up. Why? Frankly, I don't know. Yes, it's long. But, why not learn about the man who is responsible for you having a Mass to go to on Sunday? No one is saying you have to read it all at once. But start. This book is the perfect complement to Dr. White's literary Horn of the Unicorn.

It's rather difficult to summarize this book, so what I thought I would do for the review is take out selected quotes/passages. I cannot hope to contextualize tone and content for all these quotes, but I hope they provide fruit for thought and encouragement to read the book, as they are arranged generally in chronological order of pages, but are arranged topically, with no specified order. In a few instances, the Archbishop is being facetious, but I will leave that to you to discern...

On the birth of baby Marcel, his mother remarked:

"He will have an important role in the Church close to the Pope" (7).

"Every evening, family prayers gave them the opportunity to put right any disagreements that might have occured throughout the day, and to unite their hearts in God's love" (8).

On receiving his first Holy Communion:

"he (Marcel) took his finest pen and wrote to the Pope to thank him for the decree which enabled him to receive Holy Communion at the age of six" (9).

Reflecting later on his childhood experience of World War I:

"We saw that human life was insignificant and that one has to know how to suffer" (15).

Fr. Berto regarding the spirit of the French Seminary in Rome under Fr. Le Floch:

"Sentire cum ecclesia: judge as the Church judges, in the light of the teachings of the Councils and the Popes, in the light of St. Thomas Aquinas, leaving aside all personal ideas in order to embrace the mind of the Church" (35).

"For him (Lefebvre) referring to the magisterium of the Roman authorities was enough to end any discussion or correct any deviation" (43).

On the unhappy suppression of Action Francaise through misinformation given to Pius XI (my opinion, not expressed by H.E.):

"The condemnation of Action Francaise was a turning point in the history of the Church; from then on the bishoprics were given to left-wing clerics whilst all opposition to liberalism was falsely tarred with the same brush as Action Francaise. Fr. Le Floch was branded in this way, as Archbishop Lefebvre later on" (49).

The Archbishop on Action Francaise:

"Oh, it was not a Catholic movement, but it was a movement against the disorder sown by the Freemasons in the country, in France: it was a healthy reaction, a determination to re-establish order and discipline, a return to morality and to Christian morality" (49).

On Pius XI:

"Pius XI was not a liberal. But he was weak, very weak in the practical sphere and rather inclined to compromise with the world" (51).

From a fellow seminarian:

"He (the Archbishop) wasn't a run of the mill person. His features were those of someone who took life seriously. My companions told me, 'He knows what he wants and he knows how to get it.' He made a very good impression on me, I found him impressive" (59).

On rubrics of the Mass:

"The piety of a priest is not to be measured by how long he pauses at the Memento but by the degree of his obedience to the rubrics" (62).

On the unsatisfactory resolving (again, my opinion) of the Roman Question:

"I felt that the Roman question had been resolved quite otherwise than he (Lefebvre) had hoped. He looked upset" (65).

Regarding a situation in which the Archbishop, as head of the seminary, talked about social action:

"Another similar objection went thus: 'We are in a seminary and you want to give us an education in politics. But we are told a priest should not play at politics.' Fr. Lefebvre gave a clear answer to this:

You must understand the truth correctly: the priest should not be involved in politics, but let us make a distinction. If politics means the various acceptable ways of ruling and governing, then yes. If politics means the model of the body politic, its origin, consittution, and goal, then it falls under the moral law, and thus under the teaching of the Church. The priest must be able to say such and such a principle is wrong or significant. You must be guides who are able to enlighten others; you must be men of principle" (146).

Some statistics under Bishop Lefebvre's reign in Dakar:

"Between 1947 and 1962, the numbers of children in primary education rose from two thousand pupils in nine schools to twelve thousand pupils in fifty-one schools. In 1947, there were only 150 pupils in four secondary schools whereas in 1962 there were 1,600 pupils in eleven schools. One out of every 5.6 pupils was studying in a Catholic school" (165).

Regarding an "innovation":

"On Easter Tuesday at the annual meeting of the mission superiors, the creation of Fogola or 'Friends of the Christians' was unanimously accepted and received the Archbishop's approval. The Fogola would receive a special identity card and be registered at a mission station. Without actually being Christians, they would belong sociologically to the Christian community, get to learn about Revelation, and could be baptized if the obstacle impeding their baptism (often polygamy -s.) were removed. Later, after independence, the fruits of this high-risk strategy were apparent when the 'sociologically Christian masses,' as Archbishop Lefebvre called them, were able to resist the Islamic wave that surged over the 'animist belt.'

The Archbishop did not advocate blind progressiveness. However, some of his remarks sound strange coming from a man who would later be scornfully called "the fundamentalist." He wrote:

On the one hand, one must avoid narrowness of mind, an outdated and fossilized traditionalism that closes its eyes to the materialism and atheism running amok among the young: it locks itself away in its church, content with the presence of a few good parishioners and children. On the other hand, one must avoid a spirit of novelty qui sapit haeresim (which smacks of heresy), the heresy of activism that neglects prayer, preaching, the parish Mass on Sunday, or religious instruction.

Thus, while respecting the guidance of canon law concerning the ministry, 'the Church increases the range of means she uses to bring home the message of the Gospel through the initiatives of priests and bishops inspired by enlightened zeal.' In these conditions, Archbishop Lefebvre concluded, the spirit of the Lord and the spirit of the Church will inspire the missionary's initiatives, and give him 'the ingenuity that comes from true zeal'" (184).

The opinion of his Vicar General, Fr. Bussard:

"He had a special gift for exercising authority with kindness. He didn't look like he was in charge, but he was well and truly in charge...He was not a heavy-handed or authoritarian bishop. No, he was a bishop full of authority" (186).

"an example of what profound interior life of union with God which is the source of spiritual fruitfulness...completely absorbed in his prayers" (187).

"he is harder on rubrics than people" (188).

From a progressive priest who disagreed with the Archbishop, yet was not a liar:

"He (Lefebvre) really is the witness of that Church which was certain of her truth, rights, and power, and which considered herself alone capable of saying how best to organize society" (195).

On his being made Apostolic Delegate to French-speaking Africa, in which there were 3 Jesuit fathers in the missions:

"I, a poor Holy Ghost Father, going to preach to Jesuits!" (206)

Why Pius XII wanted Africa to become "regular":

"...the Church should no longer be a foreign institution in Africa, whence the urgent need to train a hierarchy of native bishops, and whence also the order to safeguard African customs in so far as they were reconcilable with God's law" (207).

A bishop from Cote d'Ivoire:

"(He) impressed me with his calm, his serenity, his smile, his patience when listening, and his questions that were always relevant and appropriate. He had a profound sense of the Church and the papacy" (219).

H.E. weighs in:

"It cannot be emphasized enough that Catholic French-speaking Africa owed its considerable development in the 1950s to the tenacity, tactical genius, and ceaseless, wide-ranging work of the Apostolic Delegate" (224).

In retrospect, the Archbishop in 1987 wrote:

"If the Western nations who were responsible for educating the people of Africa had not betrayed their mission and if the Church had not gone back on everything she stood for, today instead of seeing the worrying progress of Islam, most of Africa would today be Catholic" (239).

On Islam's political methods:

"The countries in which there is a Muslim majority are separating themselves as quickly as possible from the West, and using Communist methods...fanaticism, collectivism, slavery of families, these countries were especially open to Islamic customs" (240).

"...while Muslims are a minority in a Christian country they accept its laws, but when they are numerous and organized, they become aggressive and want to impose their laws" (604).

On some other innovations:

"(Lefebvre) recommended...granting wider permission for the celebration of evening Masses. He envisaged the more general use of the black clerical suit and Roman collar with a little cross on the lapel, and advocated an increase in the number of bishops so that no diocese would have more than 200,000 faithful" (273).

"I (Lefebvre) quite like the new idea of a permanent diaconate" (277).

Reflections on the effectiveness of the Coetus Fathers at the Council:

"...We were able all the same to limit the damage, to change these inexact or tendentious assertions, to add that sentence to rectify a tendentious proposition or an ambiguous expression.

But I have to admit that we did not succeed in purifying the Council of the liberal and modernist spirit that impregnated most of the schemas. Their drafters indeed were precisely the experts and Fathers tainted with this spirit. Now, what can you do when a document is in all its parts drawn up with a false meaning? It is pratically impossible to expurgate it of that meaning. It would have to be completely recomposed in order to be given a Catholic spirit..."
(295).

Fr. Berto on the Archbishop during the Council:

"I had the honor...to be his theologian...the Archbishop is far superior as a theologian to me - and would to God all the Fathers had his knowledge of theology. His theological habitus is perfectly sure and acute, and his very great devotion to the Holy See adds to it the connaturality which enables the Archbishop, even before the discursive habitus comes into play, to discern intuitively what is and waht is not compatible with the sovereign prerogatives of the Rock of the Church...I have not 'collaborated' with him...I have truly 'sub-laborated' with him..." (296).

An intervention on the new and redefined ends of marriage during the Council:

"...One could (now) say in fact, 'No conjugal love, therefore no marriage!' Yet how many marriages there are without conjugal love! They are nevertheless true marriages" (302).

On classmates in the French Seminary who had later become Bishops:

"They had sold out totally to liberalism and to the liberal theses. It is pitiful. It is one of the saddest things of my life" (317).

In a few words, the Archbishop's opposition to Dignitatis Humanae:

"the Church of Christ alone possesses the fulness and perfection of divine law, natural and supernatural, as she alone has received the mission to teach this law and the means to observe it; it is in her that Jesus Christ, Who is our law, is found in reality and truth. Consequently, she alone, always and everywhere, possesses a true right to religious liberty" (329).

to Paul VI regarding the matter:

"It contains passages that are word for word contrary to what was taught by Gregory XVI, and Pius IX" (492).

(Paul VI responded "We are not hear to discuss theology.")

and:

"Our Lord asked His apostles to preach the Gospel to all nations, not to preach liberty!" (499).

Years later the CDF responded to the Dubia presented regarding this matter with:

"the doctrine on religious liberty was 'incontestably a novelty'...it was the outcome of 'doctrinal development in continuity'" (546).

Regarding the Council as a whole:

"In an inconceivable fashion, the Council promoted the spreading of liberal errors. The Faith, morality, and ecclesiastical discipline are shaken to their foundations as all the Popes have predicted. The destruction of the Church is advancing rapidly" (335).

H.E. editorializes: "When the Magisterium malfunctions, it is Tradition that judges" (481).

On the Archbishop's obstinancy in his ideas despite opposition:

"a gentle, pig-headed man...'It is because of his training under Fr. Le Floch'...'it was because of his Maurassian education'..." (349).

Some words that clerics who like to be photographed in business suits with their cleric brothers should hear:

"The cassock makes the priest a living sermon" (361).

About the apostolate:

"There is no opposition or separation between the religious life and the apostolic life. The contemplatives' life is essentially active" (362).

"Perfect charity, according to St. Thomas, exists when one's preaching flows from the depths of contemplation" (366).

Padre Pio on the new "revising" Chapter of the Capuchins that was soon to be called, around the time of the visit of the Archbishop:

"It's all idle chatter and destruction!" (368)

Jean Madiran on the New Mass:

"To reject systematically the rites handed down, to replace them by rights which have not been handed down is to ruin entirely the traditional character of the liturgy" (401).

In the early days of the foundation of the Society:

"I would like to rebuild the true priesthood with true priests. It will be a consolation to me in the mad age in which we live" (413).

On attendance at the New Mass:

"We cannot collaborate in spreading a rite which, even if it is not heretical, leads to heresy. This is the rule I am giving my friends" (417).

"...We must avoid - I could almost say completely - assisting at the New Mass" (464).

Fr. Aulagnier observes the Archbishop during some early trials of the Society:

"...Just then I saw him weep from discouragement...I...shared...'Your Grace, we're not going to stop now; we have to continue!' He looked doubtful, but I think in the end he was deeply touched" (419).

One of the benefactors to the Archbishop, on the night the property was guaranteed to the Society:

"Well, Monseigneur, I tell you: they'll talk about this seminary of Econe throughout the world" (425).

Some words of formation to his future priests:

"The cassock is a witness, a sermon. It repels wicked spirits and those subject to them: it attracts upright and religious souls. It greatly facilitates the apostolate...

If there is one thing I have always sought, it is not to have personal ideas. We have the ideas of the Church!...As I have already told you, I do not want to impose any spiritual spirituality unless it be the spirituality of the Church..., i.e. spirituality as St. Thomas conceives of it in his Summa Theologica: a spirituality based on the exercise of virtues, the truths of faith, the supernatural virtues, and the beatitudes. This is how our spiritual life normally works" (437).

On some early professors of the seminary:

"Fr. Guerard des Lauriers came to give a class in Mariology for which he had scribbled his notes on the back of a subway ticket but which still went beyond the abilities of the average student to understand. Professor Fay's talks presented a grand historical overview of the successive epochs of the Counter-Church, from the cabal and esoteric sects up to Freemasonry with its present-day role..." (445).

On Fr. Barielle:

"Haunted by the idea of eternal salvation, Fr. Barielle lived by faith and was in touch with heavenly realities: the Blessed Trinity, the Sacred Heart, St. Joseph, the holy Angels. He lived on these devotions, taught them, and promoted them" (447).

On speaking tours, the Archbishop might comment:

"Learn how to do without television, support the loyal priests, organize catechism groups. I pray to God that you keep the Faith until your dying day, so that the Church might continue" (451).

On why vocations to the brotherhood might be disappearing:

"...are rare in our age because they require a spirit of faith which is tending to disappear from a world wholly obsessed with human advancement" (456).

On "Rome"

"...I would have preferred to die rather than have to confront Rome and the Pope!" (478).

"...the problem of the Mass is at the heart of this conflict between Econe and Rome" (486).

"...Of course I am not the one who makes the truth, but neither is the Pope" (490).

"...Do we really have a Pope or an intruder sitting on the chair of Peter? Happy are those who lived and died without having to ask themselves such questions!" (505).

"It is possible that we might be forced to believe that the Pope is not the Pope. Because it seems to me initially - I do not yet want to say it solemnly and publicly - that it is impossible for a Pope to be publically and formally a heretic" (536).

"These notions (difficulties of jurisdiction, disobedience, and apostolicity) presuppose a Pope who is Catholic in his faith and in his government" (541).

"The See of Peter and the posts of authority in Rome being occupied by anti-Christs, the destruction of the Kingdom of our Lord is being rapidly carried out...especially through the corruption of the Holy Mass which is both the splendid expression of the triumph of our Lord on the Cross - Regnavit a ligno Deus - and the source of the extension of His kingdom over souls and over societies..." (549).

After St. Nicholas du Chardonnet was taken back from the Modernists:

"We should seize a church in every diocese!" (512)

On returning to the land:

"They (faithful) should home school if possible, and go back to the land, which is healthy, brings one closer to God, evens out temperaments, and encourages one to work" (513).

Notes in the margin of his copy of Redemptor Hominis, by JPII:

"No. 11 presents a wholly new conception of Christianity. It is Teilhardian humanism..."

And further:

"Where does he speak of incorporation in Christ through baptism?" (529)

Towards the end, during his hospitalization, to his nurses:

"You have got a good deal out of me: I am paying full price and you are not even feeding me!" (609)

H.E. should be commended for a fine and utterly complete vita of this man, without whom it can be said we would not have the Traditional Mass today.

The True Holocaust

This piece was subsequently published in the March 2009 issue of The Four Marks. Please visit their home site: www.thefourmarks.com.

As a big fan of Bishop Williamson, I have thought it prudent to stay quiet about the excommunications, the gotcha journalism of the Swedish television reporter waiting three months to air an interview, and the ensuing apology that Bishop Williamson gave for causing a media ruckus. When all the world is howling, the last thing you want is to give them more to howl about.

However, the Vatican communique on Wednesday of this week really was the last straw for me. Now, for the first time since the Vatican prior to 1960, someone from the clergy is being told he won't be considered Catholic unless he recants something – but, get this – that something is how that clergyman thinks regarding a historical topic.

Mind you - this is not Hans Kung being asked to renounce his heresies, or someone like von Balthasar to renounce his idea of "razing the bastions" of the Catholic Church - this is Bishop Williamson being asked to revise his opinion of the Holocaust.

I was so stunned when I first heard this. The first place I looked was the rite of Baptism - the rite that all of us - young or old - had to pass through to become a Catholic. The rite reads:

"N., quid petis ab Ecclesia Dei?"
"Fidem."
"Fides, quid tibi praestat?"
"Si igitur vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata. Diliges Dominum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, et ex tota anima tua, et ex tota mente tua, et proximum tuum sicut teipsum."

We ask of the Church of God faith. No more, no less.

The Holocaust Question

We are Christians. We are Christians because we profess Christ. I don't presume to tell Jews about their religion. I cannot believe that Jewish leaders find themselves competent to tell us how to be Christians.

So, there is a litmus test for being integrated into Catholicism now - but it isn't the Oath against Modernism, or the repudiation of heresy by a Protestant. Nope, it's the recognition of some abstract understanding - notice the note from the Secretary of State is purposely vague - of a historical event. We all know Jews were killed in World War II. So were a lot of gypsies, and Poles, and Catholics, and priests. The whole world suffered. That is a fact, and not a matter of opinion. But in the rise and fall of history, where things get discovered and refuted as centuries go on and more history comes to light, isn’t it foolish to believe that 50 years after an event, we know absolutely everything about it? I certainly have not investigated the Holocaust thoroughly. It is certain that Jews were killed - how they were killed, I'm not sure - because I'm not willing to pronounce definitively on events in history I haven't studied well. The point here isn't whether Jews were killed - Bishop Williamson admitted that in the interview - he said that Jews died in concentration camps. The point is that recognizing "how many" Jews were killed and "how" is hardly a matter of the Catholic Faith. How can any reasonable person argue thus? By the way, no one is arguing that it isn’t lamentable that Jews were killed for being Jews. It was a sad, terrible travesty. Let no one think this is about celebrating Jewish death.

However, what use is speaking of the Shoah and invoking "never forget" if all that matters is Jewish blood? There is a scene in Steven Spielberg's Munich that reminds me precisely of this. A character says in response to the death of an innocent bystander: "the only blood that matters to me is Jewish blood." If the Jews want us to "never forget" then don't let us forget about those who are innocent who are being slaughtered. Start by immediately ceasing Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians under the guise of "collateral damage."

Those of us who have read history find enormous cognitive dissonance in the modern state of Israel. One may recall one of the powerful scenes from Schindler's List where Jews are being evicted from their homes and their belongings are being flung off balconies and out of windows. Jews should know what it's like to lose their homes and lose their loved ones. Yet, we see not one ounce of this recollection in the current manifestation of Israel's militancy against the Palestinians – murdering them in the streets and bulldozing their homes.

The Excommunication Question

Joan of Arc died excommunicated and she was later declared a saint. This is singular proof and precedent that excommunications can be in error. They are certainly not doctrinal pronouncements. The fact that the four bishops had their excommunications lifted, while nothing was said about the two consecrating bishops, is at best disingenuous and at worst an offense against justice. Was the Archbishop acting according to his conscience or not? Dare the Vatican of Assisi recognize this? The question of a “papal mandate” was never in question for Bishop de Castro Mayer, who told anyone who would hear him on June 30, 1988, that “we have no Pope.”

If the excommunications were indeed automatic, what changed in order for the excommunications to be lifted? What is changing now? That leads us to the one non-negotiable truth of the Conciliar Church that runs in tandem with Holocaust Denial – Vatican II denial.

The Vatican II Question

I have always been troubled by the formula proposed by Ratzinger to Archbishop Lefebvre: "Vatican II in the light of tradition." Here is the actual text from the May 1988 Protocol: "Regarding certain points taught by Vatican Council II or concerning later reforms of the liturgy and law, and which do not appear to us easily reconcilable with Tradition, we pledge that we will have a positive attitude of study and communication with the Apostolic See, avoiding all polemics" (Laisney 73).

But here's the reality, and part of why the Archbishop "unsigned" or "withdrew his signature" from this document:

Vatican II in the light of Tradition? This is not possible.

We cannot view Vatican II in the light of tradition because Vatican II has nothing to do with Tradition. It has to do with Innovation. Innovation that at times directly contradicts previous papal teaching. How does the spirit and 40-years of proof and praxis of Sacrosanctum Concilium square with Pius XII's famous and forgotten Mediator Dei, in which the idea of archaism is repudiated: "Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical, would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of Divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstance and situation" (Pacelli 29). This is but one small example, but when a conciliar document is compared to a papal encyclical, both ostensibly magisterial documents, and they are in opposition, what wins? The very fact that a Catholic has to ask such a question is an indication that things are gravely wrong.

Those of us who have studied this know that Vatican II cannot be simply swept under the rug and forgotten about. It happened. Fact. It issued teachings that contradicted previous Papal teachings and praxis. Fact. “What is truth” is no longer a question that Pilate asks alone – those of us who are not content with the simplistic often-used Traditionalist nostrum “it was just a pastoral council” must answer this question: How should a Catholic view Vatican II? The Vatican, which seems to take its cues from people like Angela Merkel these days, says that what is necessary is "the full acknowledgment of the Second Vatican Council."

Vatican II is the Trent of this generation and has been enforced ruthlessly, as perhaps Trent was. But Trent’s goals were to vivify the Faith and make it more relevant in the face of worldwide heresy. Vatican II’s goals were precisely to water down the Faith and make it less relevant – to devolve to a Church where Scott Hahn would seek membership, and be told by a Catholic priest that he didn’t need to convert.

It is not my goal here, nor am I as competent as others, to offer a full-throated repudiation of Vatican II, but I often think of what another Society bishop answered me when I asked what we were supposed to do with Vatican II:

Bishop Tissier de Mallerais: I will say, one day the Church should erase this Council. She will not speak of it anymore. She must forget it. The Church will be wise if she forgets this council.

Stephen Heiner: Let me read it back to you from my notes. The Church must erase this Council, not speak of it, forget it.

Bishop Tissier de Mallerais: Forget it, yes. As a blank – tabula rasa.
(de Mallerais)

It seems to me that we are back to June 29, 1988, the day before the consecration of bishops. The Vatican doesn't see any way back to what was always done prior to the Council. Indeed, as the many encyclicals of JPII illustrate, there weren't really any councils or encyclicals before Vatican II, as he never quoted teachings from anything prior to it. Traditionalists, and one would hope, the SSPX, don't see any way forward with the way things have been. We have watched the destruction over the past 40 years and refuse to go along "with the program." We refuse Modernism, and all its works, and all its pomps.

We seek what any postulant does in the ancient rite of Baptism I quoted from above: "faith." If we cannot have that inside the "official" structures of the "Church" we will do what we have continued to - all of us, since we discovered the true Catholic Mass - cling to our religion. And our guns – literal and figurative – if we have them.

And we won't be lectured to by non-Christians on what it takes to be a Catholic. Now or ever. Indeed, we know that the true Holocaust was offered by Jesus Christ to His Father on the day He died for our sins. Let us “never forget” that or allow that to be denied.

Works Cited

De Mallerais, Bishop Bernard Tissier. Interviewed by Stephen Heiner. The Remnant. 30 April 2006.

Laisney, Francois. Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican. Kansas City: Angelus Press, 1999.

Pacelli, Pope Pius XII. Mediator Dei. Boston: Daughters of St. Paul, 1947.

Photo was taken in 2006 in Tustin, California. His Excellency and I were working on the final draft of his first book. He was just starting to adjust to my taking lots of photos, so this is a hidden candid of him saying the rosary, amidst the bustle of Southern California.