Fr. Jacques-Yves Pertin

Jealousy long supposed that Cardinal Merry del Val owed his prodigious rise in dignity to a privilege of birth. What a lightning career to those who saw only that! Secret chamberlain, secretary of papal missions to London and Berlin, and "monsignor" at the age of 22, even before his priestly ordination; at 24, secretary of an extraordinary mission to the Imperial Court of Vienna; at 28,Apostolic Delegate to Hungary; at 32, Delegate to Canada; archbishop at 35, and Cardinal Secretary of State at 38.

If they had only known! If they had seen that, far from seeking honors, he declined them. "From the desire of being exalted, deliver me, Jesus," he was to cry out later, in his Litany of Humility.

Born October 10, 1865, second son of the Marquis Raphael Merry del Val, distinguished Spanish diplomat of Irish origin, and of an English mother, he is of noble blood and "multi-national." The Merry del Val family prided itself on having a martyr among its ancestors-Dominguito del Val, who at the age of seven was crucified by the Jews against a wall of the cathedral of Saragossa, out of hatred for the Christian religion, on Good Friday of the year 1250.

From his earliest childhood, the most profound Catholic instincts were instilled in him. Once, as the family's nanny led him down to his parents to tell them, "Good night," he drew a little cookie from his pocket and murmured, lifting it up: "This is what I will do with the host when I will be a priest."

He was to become a priest after brilliant studies, first in England but then in Rome, after Pope Leo XIII met the young man during an audience granted to his parents and insisted that he pursue his studies at the Academy for Noble Ecclesiastics, an institute designed to prepare young men for the highest diplomatic responsibilities.

As early as 1889, charges rained down on the ardent young man, enough to worry him, for he desired the apostolate more than the art of diplomacy. "Give me souls and keep the rest" was the motto of his life's passion. He could not foresee what was to come.

In the Presence of a Saint

Pope Leo XIII died on July 20, 1903. Msgr. Merry del Val, after the sudden death of Msgr. Volpini, was named Secretary of the Conclave by the dean of the Sacred College, not only because of his obvious capacities, but still more because of his clear virtue "which had earned him both in Rome and outside of Rome the reputation of a priest animated by the spirit of God." His first meeting with Pius X was to take place during this conclave." As strange as it may seem," he was to write years later,"! had never met His Eminence Joseph Cardinal Sarto."

It became clear that the conclave would never reach a rapid decision if Cardinal Sarto persisted in his firm and energetic refusal to become pope, in spite of the numerous votes in his favor. The situation seemed apt to endure, and Msgr. Merry del Val was sent by the dean to speak with Cardinal Sarto:

It was nearly noon when I entered the dark and silent chapel. I saw the cardinal kneeling on the marble floor near the altar, deep in prayer, his head in his hands. I knelt down beside him and in a low voice, delivered the message entrusted to me. As soon as I had done so, he began to weep. Before such affliction, I held my breath, awaiting his response. It was the first time that I had come into contact with him, and I felt I had been in the presence of a saint.

 

"My Merry"

This was to be the start of a long and unshakable friendship, which was to lead them, by the designs of Providence, to become only one soul and one heart in inscribing a new and unforgettable page in the history of the Church.

While the world outside debated, the new pope meditated and prayed. On October 18, 1903, St. Pius X named Msgr. Merry del Val his Secretary of State. The Pope declared a few days later:

I chose him because he speaks several languages, is the son of a diplomat and a diplomat himself, and he understands the problems of every country. He is very humble; he is a saint. He comes in every morning to inform me of all the world events. I never need to make the slightest reproach. In addition, and most importantly, he is without compromise.

To help him make up his mind, Pope Pius X told him, "Accept; it is the will of God. We will work and suffer together for love of the Church."

Henceforth, the archbishop become cardinal no longer belonged to himself. He belonged to the Church alone. For 11 years without interruption, suffering, praying, and battling, his name and his work were to be bound up with the name and the work of Pope Pius X in a profound unity of thoughts and aspirations.

When one looked closely at the pontiff and the Secretary of State, one was not struck by the contrast in their origins but rather by their affinity of soul and by the harmony of their thoughts, sentiments and intentions.

Better still is the testimony of what the pontiff habitually wrote to him: "Eminence, I accept your advice in all things. I await the judgment of your Eminence, of which I will make my treasure."

Pius X called him "his cardinal," "his Merry," and declared that they would "separate him from his own head" if they were to separate him from the cardinal's "zealous and hard-working support." The Pope's own summary of the cardinal's collaboration was "so excellent for Our Person and so eminent in merit for the Church." Not only did he assist the person of the pope, but in so doing his sanctity touched all of the Church.

For the Honor of the Pope and of the Church

His biographer, Msgr. Cenci, defines the cardinal's action as "a prudent firmness." The truth was his greatest diplomatic weapon. He remained profoundly outraged when someone declared to him that God would judge favorably those who lied in high office, for it is not always possible to speak the truth, above all when one would avoid criticism. "True prudence is not in compromise," he often repeated. Because of this, he refused a pontifical audience requested by former United States president Theodore Roosevelt.Why? Because Roosevelt had decided to pay a public visit to the Methodists that afternoon. "It is not even a question of faith," the cardinal was to say, "but one of propriety."

Nor was there any compromise in the letter he addressed to the Catholic Associations of Italy, who had too great a tendency to meddle in party politics. The cardinal's directive was subtle: "Catholics who are deputies, yes; Catholic deputies, no." The cardinal explained his thought by saying that Catholic men of politics should not "present themselves as candidates for the Catholics as though they were forming a political party."

He sometimes met with violent reactions. On one occasion he barely escaped an ambush set for him at Castel Gandolfo by anti-clericals.

The Apostle

After the death of Pope Pius X, he remained "the representative and the depositary of his thought." That is undoubtedly the reason why he was granted only three days to vacate the Secretariat of State, a time-frame that rather resembled an affront.

"To [St. Pius X] I had given all of my strength. Nothing could ever make me forget the anguish that I felt at the death of my pope."

Though still archpriest of St. Peter's basilica and named Secretary of the Holy Office, he henceforth gave all of his time to the pious Association of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which he had founded for the youth of the working-class quarter of Trastevere.The letters of direction that he addressed to his correspondents bear witness to a soul aflame with divine charity: "Say to Our Lord," he wrote to a religious,"May Your good pleasure be my pleasure, my passion, my love. I love all that is Yours, but You above all, my God,You!" It was in these dispositions that he rendered his soul to God, peacefully and without agony, February 26, 1930.

L'Osservatore Romano of February 27, 1953, announced the beginning of the venerable cardinal's process of beatification. Its accomplishment is desirable more than ever so that he may be elevated to join Pope St. Pius X in the honor of our altars, for, as Dante (Paradise, Canto XII) wrote of St. Francis and St. Dominic:

'Tis fit that, where the one is, the other come,
That, as together to the uttermost
They strove, together may their glory bloom.

Translated exclusively from the French by Angelus Press from Fideliter (May-June 2003). Fr. Pertin, a priest of the Society of Saint Pius X, was ordained in 1997. He is assigned to the Society's priory in Toulon, France.

Fr. Christian Thouvenot

The light that shone in the Church during 11 years of pontificate was extinguished on August 20, 1914. Pope Pius X fell sick on the Feast of the Assumption of Our Lady (Aug. 15) and received extreme unction and Holy Viaticum before dying. He was buried August 23, and his tomb immediately became the object of a popular devotion.

Pope Pius X's reputation of sanctity was immediate. This was undoubtedly due to his qualities as a "miracle-saint" but also on account of the respect he inspired by his supernatural bearing.¹ A number of cardinals, archbishops, bishops, vicars and prefects apostolic, pious societies, groups of Catholic Action, Catholic universities, and many of the faithful quickly wrote expressing their desire to see Pius X proclaimed a saint without delay.² Thus in a letter dated September 24, 1916, Msgr. Leo, Bishop of Nicotera and Tropea, speaks of "a great saint and a great pope."

The flood of pilgrims was such that the Vatican crypt could no longer contain them all. As a result, Cardinal Merry del Val, archpriest of St. Peter's Basilica, had a small metal cross set into the floor of the basilica so that the faithful might kneel down directly above the tomb. The cross bore the inscription Pius Papa X.³

Cardinal Merry del Val, the former Secretary of State of Pope Pius X celebrated Holy Mass near the tomb on the 20th of every month, until February 20, 1930, when he did so for the last time-six days before his own death.

The honor of having introduced the cause of Pius X falls to the cardinals of Rome—a fact that is unique in the history of the Church. It was they who selected the postulator, appointed February 14, 1923: the Dom Benedetto Pierami, abbot of the Benedictine monks of Vallombroso, of the Roman monastery of St. Praxedes.⁴ The various diocesan processes were then opened: Rome (1923-31); Venice (1924-30); Mantua (1924-27); Treviso (1923-26).⁵

On the 20th anniversary of Pope Pius X's accession to the papal throne (June 28, 1923), Pope Pius XI had a monument raised in St. Peter's Basilica in homage to "the Father, the Saint, and the Pontiff." Catholic devotion to Pius X between the two world wars remained steadfast. This was clear on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of his birth. During the year 1935, faithful from all over the world came to visit the Vatican or Riese, Giuseppe Sarto's hometown. Cardinal Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII, earlier referred to him in the anniversary year of his birth as that "ardent flame of charity and radiant splendor of sanctity." For the 25th anniversary of his death, an imposing procession was organized for the area dioceses to the tomb of the Servant of God. On August 19, 1939, led by the patriarch of Venice and by Cardinal Salotti, pilgrims arrived at Castel Gondolfo where Pius XII delivered a stirring tribute to his predecessor. It would not be the last; Pius XII would sign the Decree for the Introduction of the Cause (Feb. 12, 1943). Thus were opened the apostolic processes: Rome (1943-1946); Venice (1944-1946); Mantua (1945-1946); Treviso (1944-1946). The canonical examination of Pope Pius X's remains took place in the chapel of the Holy Crucifix in the Vatican Basilica (May 19, 1944), where they had been transferred. They were exposed for a period of 45 days.

Opening the coffin, they found the body intact, clothed in the papal insignia as it had been buried 30 years before. The pectoral cross and the pastoral ring shone brilliantly....Under the taut skin which covered the face the outline of the skull was clearly recognizable. The hollows of the eyes appeared dark but not empty; they were covered by eyelids much wrinkled and sunk. The hair was white and covered the top of the head completely. All of the body, which Pius X had forbidden to be touched by unconsecrated hands, even for the traditional embalming, was in an excellent state of conservation; no part of the skeleton was uncovered, no bones were exposed. The body was rigid, but the arms were mobile and flexible, at the shoulders as well as the elbows. The hands—the humble hands of Pius X—were beautiful and slender, with the nails on the fingers perfectly preserved.⁶

Once the apostolic processes had been completed and the final objections had been dismissed—notably those concerning the conduct of the Servant of God in his attacks against modernism [see "St. Pius X: Sodalitium Pianum," The Angelus, Nov. 2003, pp.5-10-Ed.]-Pius XII, having heard the cause, proclaimed that Pius X had "practiced the virtues to an heroic degree" and bestowed on him the title of Venerable. With the proclamation of heroic virtue, the Church's role as judge reaches an end, and she only awaits a confirmation by God Himself. The commission of experts of the Sacred Congregation of Rites recognized two miracles. The first was the instantaneous cure of a Visitandine nun of Dole [in eastern France, birthplace of Louis Pasteur-Ed], Sr. Marie-Frangoise Deperras, who had bone cancer in her left femur and was declared to be incurable by her doctors. While she was suffering from horrible pain, the community began a novena, placing a relic of the Pope Pius X on her chest. She got worse! The community did not let itself be discouraged, and the cure took place during the course of a second novena (Dec. 7, 1928). The commission of experts of the Congregation of Rites judged (Mar. 21, 1950) that the cure was "instantaneous, perfect, definitive, and clearly of a supernatural order." The second miracle was that worked upon a Poor Clare from Boves (Italy), Sr. Benedetta De Maria, afflicted with a malignant tumor of the abdomen. The novena began February 26, 1938. One morning, the sick Sister touched a piece of a relic of Pius X to herself and was immediately cured. The tumor, as big as a grapefruit, entirely disappeared and the pain stopped. Sr. Benedetta dressed and went to join the community in choir, crying "Healed! Healed! Pius X! Pius X!"

Pius XII gave his sanction to these two miracles. On the Feast of the Apparition of Our Lady at Lourdes (Feb. 11, 1951) he signed the decree of approval of the two miracles needed for the beatification. Finally, in his decree De Tuto (Mar. 4, 1951) he declared that the Church could safely proceed to the beatification of the Servant of God, Pope Pius X.

On June 3, 1951 at St. Peter's in Rome, before 23 cardinals, hundreds of bishops and archbishops, and a crowd of 100,000 faithful, Pius XII explained the circumstances under which he proceeds to this beatification⁷:

Behold that God, in the secret designs of His Providence, chose his [Pius X's] unworthy Successor...to allow the brilliant star of his white presence to shine forth in the shadows that darken the

yet uncertain path of today's world, in order to light the way and strengthen the step of disoriented humanity."

After having pointed out that no pope had been canonized in the last 200 years,⁸ Pius XII divided his allocution into two parts: 1) Pius X was a pastor patterned after the model of the Good Shepherd, and 2) His works give testimony of his zeal for the universal Church. A summary of this address follows:

Pope Pius X shone by his great simplicity and affability, as well as by his approachability—but also by the firmness of his fatherly hand. Poor in earthly goods but rich in faith and the Catholic virtues, he seemed to have been born to hold the rudder of the Church.

E Supremi Apostolatus, his first encyclical (Oct. 4, 1903),⁹ was a flame enlightening minds and enkindling hearts. In it he enunciated the exact diagnosis of the evils and the errors of the age, and at the same time the means and the remedies necessary to cure them. It is a trophy of clarity and persuasion, forceful and wise. His very words revealed the soul of a Pastor who lived in God and of God, with no other intention than to lead his lambs and sheep back to Him.

The virtues offeree and of prudence, which he was able to practice in perfect balance, were the fruit of his pastoral solicitude for the freedom of the Church, for the purity of doctrine, and for the defense of the flock of Christ against threatening danger. Some, however, did not greet the government of Pope Pius X with the comprehension and loyal adhesion expected of them. In any case, the experience of Pope Pius X had taught him not to be surprised at being treated as "intransigent" when fighting liberalism or Freemasonry.¹⁰

In fact, Pius X gave evidence of an enlightened prudence during those periods that were the most difficult and the most trying, when his responsibilities weighed most heavily. At these times, he turned to the assistance of his faithful Secretary of State, that great Raphael Cardinal Merry del Val. The Pope's admirable balance allowed him to deliver judgments that were indeed inspired by heavenly wisdom:

With his eagle-eye, more perceptive and more accurate than the myopic view of short-sighted reasoners, he saw the world such as it was. He saw the mission of the Church in the world. He saw with the eyes of a holy Pastor exactly where his duty lay in the midst of a dechristianized society, and of a Christianity infected-or at least threatened-by the errors of the time and the perversity of the age.

Pope Pius XII sketched the portrait of a gentle pope, who was kind, paternal and peace-loving, but firm and unshakable when his duty commanded him to speak:

The humble "country priest," as he sometimes liked to describe himself—and it does not lessen his greatness to call him thus—in the face of the attacks perpetrated against the indefeasible rights of liberty and human dignity, and against the sacred rights of God and the Church, knew how to draw himself up to the stature of a giant in all the majesty of his sovereign authority. Then his non possumus-"It is not possible"-made the powerful of the earth tremble and sometimes retreat, as it reassured the hesitant and galvanized the timid.

Pope Pius XII drew attention to his zeal for the moral influence of the Church. Pius X was to become the incomparable patron of the sciences, both sacred and profane: Biblical, philosophical, and theological studies, as well as art, chant, and sacred music. He called Pope Pius X's codification of canon law (1917 Code of Canon Law) a "masterpiece."

Another zeal which enflamed him was that of priestly holiness-a zeal to look after the pastors of the sacred flock. More than anything, Pope Pius X was vigilant that the clergy be well formed in both learning and sanctity, above all by studying and teaching Christian doctrine.¹¹ He took care to define and research the collaboration of the laity in the priestly apostolate, so isolated by the age:

Without undermining the principles, he was able to organize popular Christian action, mitigate the rigor of the Non Expedit, and prepare the ground for that conciliation which was to bring religious peace to Italy.¹²

He was to the highest degree a "Pope of the Eucharist" because, Pius XII said, he "gave Jesus to the children and the children to Jesus." In conclusion, Pius XII insisted that:

In the person [of Pius X] and by his work, God wished to prepare the Church for the new and difficult duties that a troubled future held in store for her. He wished to prepare, in so timely a way, a Church united in her doctrine and efficient in her pastors; a generous laity and an educated faithful; a vigilant conscience, aware of dangers threatening the life of society. If today the Church of God—far from retreating before the forces that would destroy all spiritual values-suffers, combats by the divine strength, progresses, and redeems, it is due to the active foresight and the sanctity of Pius X. Today it becomes manifest that all of his pontificate was supernaturally oriented according to a plan of love and redemption to dispose our hearts and minds to engage in our own battles, and to assure our triumph and those of future generations.

The Sacred Congregation of Rites placed his feast day on September 3 for the dioceses of Rome, Treviso, Mantua, and Venice.¹³ The canonization took place less than three years later (Jan. 17, 1954). This final step required that the Sacred Congregation of Rites record two new miracles¹⁴which had both occurred after the beatification. The first was that of attorney Francesco Belsami of Naples who was struck by a serious heart illness declared incurable by his doctors. Threatened with imminent death, Mr. Belsami received a picture of the Blessed on his chest. At the point of death and left alone one night by his attending physician, he suddenly felt himself cured. His extremely serious infectious pulmonary abscess had been cured instantaneously, perfectly, and by a supernatural cause. The second miracle was to effected upon a Daughter of Charity, Sr. Maria Ludovica Scorcia, of Palermo (Italy), afflicted by a serious meningeal encephalomyelitis due to a neurotropic virus. From the onset of the illness-which was absolutely organic, according to her doctors—the entire community multiplied novenas to the Blessed. During one night, she fell into a peaceful sleep. At dawn, she was able to go to the chapel unassisted, having recovered all of her strength—entirely cured. The doctors confirmed her cure that same morning, perfect, immediate, and lasting due to supernatural causes.

Canonization

Perspective

The canonization by Pope Pius XII of Blessed Pope Pius X (May 29, 1954),¹⁵ 40 years after his death, took place at a very precise epoch in the life of the Church, and in a very particular context, one that could almost be called a doctrinal and disciplinary "getting a grip" against the united influences of the "New Theology" (in doctrinal matters) and Marxism (in the social arena) in the post-World War II world. The dates speak for themselves:

1945:This was the year an article by Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. was published denouncing the New Theology as a throwback to modernism.¹⁶The immanentism of Blondel, taken up again by Fathers de Lubac, Rousselot, and Huby, and also different movements, such as that of the priest-workers, were the objects of surveillance by the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. The same applies to the Dominicans Congar, Feret, and Chenu, whose work A School of Theology: The Saulchoir had been put on the Index of Forbidden Books a few years earlier.¹⁷

1950:In this year, the dogma of the Assumption of our Lady was proclaimed. Humani Generis against evolution, false ecumenism, and the abandonment of scholasticism, was published.

1954:The year of Pope St. Pius X's canonization, which must be seen in the light of three documents of Pope Pius XII: the Discourse of Canonization (May 29, 1954), followed by his Allocution to Cardinals and Bishops (May 31, 1954),¹⁸ itself completed by the Allocution to the Sacred College and to the Episcopacy (Nov. 2, 1954).

Discourse of Canonization

In his Discourse of Canonization, Pope Pius XII expressed his great joy:

Perhaps for the first time in the history of the Church, the formal canonization of a pope is proclaimed by him who once had the privilege of serving him as a member of the Roman Curia.

He then paid homage to "the illustrious champion of the Church."

The first great accomplishment of St. Pius X, acknowledged Pope Pius XII, was his formulation and publication of Canon Law. When Pope Pius X declared in his first encyclical that his goal was to "restore all things in Christ," he meant to "recapitulate" all things, to bring all things back to Christ. But what is the way that gives us access to Jesus Christ? The response, which was just as valid yesterday as it is today, and forever, is the Catholic Church. This was therefore his primary concern, to render the Church ever more apt and open, in a very concrete way, to the movement of mankind toward Jesus Christ. To this end, he conceived the ambitious task of renewing the body of ecclesiastical laws in such a way as to give to the entire organism of the Church a more regular way of functioning and a greater accuracy and rapidity of movement, necessary in view of an outside world ever more dynamic and complex.

This "assuredly difficult work," underlined Pope Pius XII, was certainly worthy of Pope Pius X's practical common sense and of his energetic personality.¹⁹ But more profoundly, it reflected his conviction that the reality of God

is the origin and the foundation of all order, all justice, and every right in the world. Where there is God, there order reigns, and justice and right; and, conversely, all just order, sustained by right, manifests the presence of God. But what institution on earth ought to manifest this fecund relation between God and right more eminently than the Church, the mystical body of Christ?...[That is why] the Code of Canon Law will ever remain the great monument to his pontificate, and we can consider the man himself to be the providential saint of the present time.

The second distinctive characteristic for which Pius XII canonized his predecessor was that he was an intrepid champion "of the unity of the Church in her deepest foundations: the Faith."

The lucidity and the firmness with which Pius X led the victorious battle against the errors of modernism bear witness to what heroic degree the faith burned in the heart of the saint....[He] had the clear awareness of fighting for the most sacred cause of God and human souls...[with] the indomitable stamina of an athlete.

Not only did he save the Faith, but also the intelligence necessary to pose an act of faith. Said Pope Pius XII:

The conservation of the intimate union between faith and science is so great a good for all humanity that this second noble work of the Pontiff is also of such an importance that it reaches far beyond the frontiers of the Catholic world.

When we see the consequences of modernism, concerning the Faith (atheism) and scientific understanding (agnosticism and immanent subjectivism), it is clear that St. Pius X saved human intelligence along with Catholic truth. Without doubt, "his firmness in the face of error may still remain a scandal for some," but "in reality it is a service of great charity rendered to all humanity by a saint, in his quality of Head of the Church."

A third characteristic of Pius X's personality was, obviously, his sanctity. "As a humble parish priest, as a bishop, as Supreme Pontiff, he was always convinced that the sanctity to which God had destined him was priestly sanctity," especially in the perpetual renewal of the sacrifice of the Cross in the Holy Mass, and by the Eucharistic ministry. Pius XII remarked:

Thanks to the profound vision that he possessed of the Church as a society, Pius X recognized the power of the Eucharist to nourish her interior life most substantially, and to raise her far above all human associations....[This is a] providential example for the modern world, in which earthly society, become ever more of a puzzle in its own eyes, seeks with anxiety the solution that will give it back a soul! May it thus regard as a model the Church gathered around her altars....In the Church alone-and, through her, in the Eucharist, which is "a life hidden with Christ in God"—can be found the source and the secret of a renewal of the life of society....The Eucharist and the interior life: such is the supreme and most universal predication that Pius X now addresses, from the heights of glory, to every soul. He was the apostle of the interior life, and in this age of machines, technology and organization, he now emerges as the saint and the guide of the men of today.

The canonization of Pope St. Pius X, therefore, bears a triple message: 1) The effort of the Pontiff to organize the Church—the only path to Jesus Christ-was the Code of Canon Law; 2) The defense of the Faith—foundation of the unity of the Church—took the form of a battle against modernism; and 3) His priestly sanctity, through the primacy of the spiritual life, transformed Pius X into the Pope of the Eucharist.

The Allocutions

In the two allocutions, already cited, of 1954, delivered to the cardinal and bishops, Pope Pius XII delivered a very precise message to the episcopacy concerning the duties incumbent upon them in virtue of their triple charge and their divinely instituted prerogatives: magisterium, priesthood, and government. These are the three offices (teaching, sanctifying, and governing) of the priest.

As for what concerned the duty of magisterium, Pius XII reaffirmed that, by divine right, the only true doctors and masters are the pope and the bishops. All other teachers, be they learned theologians, only act by delegation, and according to a mission or an office that could never exist independently of this authority. Thus he puts bishops on their guard against professors or theologians who neglect the common teaching of the magisterium to cultivate, each within his method or his discipline, "modern ways of thinking" by a culpable curiosity for

all that is new: in the manner of speaking of divine things, in the celebration of the divine worship, in Catholic institutions, and even in private exercises of piety.²⁰

The Pope went on to remind the bishops that the questions of religion and morality-truths which absolutely transcend the sensible order-fall exclusively to the office and the authority of the Church.

Finally, Pius XII warned against a certain theology "of the laity" that tends to claim a sort of autonomy with respect to the magisterium, in the name of an effusion of charisms like those mentioned by St. Paul, and in the name of certain laymen who, throughout history, have been remarkable for their apostolic zeal, moved by an interior force, without reference to any magisterial authority:

Exactly the opposite is true: for there has never been in the Church-there is not today nor will there ever be-a legitimate lay magisterium which God would have released from the authority, the guidance and the oversight of the sacred Magisterium. What is more, their very refusal of submission provides a convincing argument and a basis for their condemnation. Those laymen who speak and act in such a way are not led by the spirit of God and of Christ.

In what regarded the duty to sanctify, after having pointed out to what extent the altar and the Eucharistic Sacrifice were the essence and center of Pope Pius X's devotion, Pius XII presented the priest as he who offers the sacrifice. "Where there exists no real power to offer sacrifice," he said, "there is no true priesthood." It was the Apostles, and not the faithful, "whom Christ Himself created and constituted priests, and it is upon them that He bestowed the power to offer the Sacrifice." The Priesthood as such²¹ and the common "priesthood" of the faithful, of which spoke St. Peter, are essentially different.

As for the duty of government, Pope Pius XII combated the tendency to restrict the power of pastors to purely religious matters by limiting the scope of their teaching on natural law and morality. The pope here cites Pope St. Pius X:

Whatever the Christian may do, even in the domain of earthly pursuits, he does not have the right to neglect the supernatural. What is more, he must ordain all things toward the sovereign good as to his last end, following the precepts of Christian wisdom: all of his actions, insofar as they are morally good or evil—that is, insofar as they are in conformity with natural and divine law or on the contrary depart from them-are subject to the judgment and the jurisdiction of the Church.²²

That is why social questions, by reason of their moral aspect, also fall under the competence of the hierarchy, for the social reign of Christ and the salvation of the greatest possible number of souls.

Why Have Recourse to St. Pius X?

In light of these discourses of Pope Pius XII calling witness to the "eagle-eye" of St. Pius X, we have to try to understand why, in 1954, the pope wished to canonize his predecessor fewer than 40 years after his death. Who, in 1954, was attacking the traditional structure of the Church? the traditionally accepted ecclesiology? the Faith itself, foundation of the unity of the Church? Who was seeking to transform the liturgy and the reception of the sacraments by invoking the notion of the "people of God," and in the name of a common "priesthood"? Who was speaking of paving the way for a theology of the laity? Undoubtedly, the new theologians are numerous who would defend one or another of these condemnable or dangerous viewpoints, be it in ecclesiology, or touching the Faith, or else concerning the liturgy-the life of the Catholic Church that includes the Holy Mass, the sacraments, and all her public acts of praise and adoration.

Would it be too audacious to cite a name, pointing a finger at Yves Congar, in religion Marie-Joseph, Dominican, and later cardinal? In any case, we would not be the first.

In La Pensee Catholique,²³ Fr. Luc Lefevre cites abundantly from Fr. Congar as one of the theologians urging the laity to claim its independence, thus representing a certain "lay theology" against which Pope Pius XII had spoken. The Dominican was to protest, and even demanded the right to respond.²⁴ The fact remains that numerous citations drawn from Paving the Way for a Theology of the Laity [published 1953 by Cerf, Paris-Ed.] correspond to the warning issued by Rome. Moreover, Fr. Congar had been militating for this "lay theology" for years. This element of the modern movement, advanced by Fr. Congar as early as 1947,²⁵ has been expressed by Fr. Dabin:²⁶

[Lay theology] rediscovers and reaffirms, within the mystery of the Church, a mystery of the Holy Spirit and a mystery of the laity: a pneumatology and a "laicology."

As early as February 18, 1954, Congar himself had a presentiment, fearing that Pope Pius XIFs Allocution to the Cardinals and Bishops of May 31 would finally be Rome's document regarding the laity.²⁷

The canonization of St. Pius X by Pope Pius XII came at a very precise time in the life of the Church and in a very particular context, which one is tempted to describe as a doctrinal and disciplinary "getting a grip." lu fact, that is the moment at which Fathers Chenu, Boisselt, Feret, and Congar are removed and sent into exile,²⁸ as were many other adepts of the New Theology²⁹ —a theology under fire at the time, but which would come back into its own at the Second Vatican Council. Fr. Congar describes this period as follows:

The reign of Pius XII was suspicious and authoritarian. At the time, the Supreme Pontiff was glorified in the most appalling fashion; "autocratic," he did not accept [my] new vision of the Church, which threw into doubt the pyramidal, hierarchical, juridical system put in place by the Counter-Reformation. My ecclesiology was that of the "people of God.³⁰

It was a period of "galloping Mariology," just as people used to talk about galloping consumption, an illness that spread extremely rapidly and in an abnormal way. The Pope himself ordered the preparation of the dogmatic definition of the bodily Assumption of Mary, Mother of God-I was not at all in favor of that...."³¹

So much so that we can fully agree with Professor Fouilloux when he writes:

In the beginning of the 1950's, the threat of an internal subversion once again appeared so serious that it was absolutely necessary to have recourse to the anti-modernist pope. The sense of the beatification (1951) and the canonization (1954) cannot be reduced simply to a desire to combat modern errors. Nonetheless, although it stagnated for a time, the cause of Pope Sarto came to completion in the middle of an ecclesiastical "cold war."³²

Interesting reflection. Without reducing Pope Pius X's canonization to the combat against modern errors alone, it was "absolutely necessary" to have recourse to the anti-modernist pope in order to do so. The noble figure of Pope St. Pius X-Pope of Order, Faith, and the Holy Eucharist—will long remain "the saint and the guide of the men of today."

With his eagle-eye, and with the eye of a prophet and a saint, Pius X saw the forces of materialism and false spiritualism conspiring against the Church and her priesthood, for the ruin of Christendom. He saw the deformation of the Gospel and of the sacred character of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the absurdities that would weaken the Catholic sense. Pius X saw these rejections, these denials and these attacks, for which some dare draw profit or glory—And the clarity, the accuracy of his perception should put us to shame, we, miserably short-sighted, who stumble against grains of dust; we, miserably short-sighted, obsessed by the present moment and haunted by the pleasure of "acquired gain" that barely lasts the day; we, miserably short-sighted, who see only ourselves, no longer seeing—or feigning no longer to see—the sacred heritage that we have received and that it is our duty to pass down in its entirety, pure and ever richer.

The profound, broad, and elevated vision of Pius X, at the beginning of this century, should put to shame the prideful of every age.³³

Translated exclusively into English by Angelus Press. Fr. Christian Thouvenot was ordained for the Society of Saint Pius X in 2000. He is currently the Rector of the Society's university in Paris, the Institut St. Pie X which sponsored the colloquium Saint Pie X: LesActes held by the Society of Saint Pius X (March 29, 2003) where he gave this conference.

1. Concerning thefama sanctitatis, or reputation for holiness, see Yves Chiron, Saint Pie X refor-mateurde I'Eglise (Versailles: Courrier de Rome, 1999) pp.342-343. Translated by Angelus Press in 2002 under the title Saint Pius X: Restorer of the Church, pp.301-302.

2. Apostolic letters Quoniam Christus, June 3, 1951, in Documentation catholique, no. 1097, col. 720.

3. Jerome Dai-Gal, Pie X (Paris: Saint Paul, 1953), p.481, note 2.

4. Ibid., p.482; note 3 gives the list of the 23 cardinals who promoted the cause, including Merry del Val, Vannutelli, Gasparri, de Lai, Bisleti, Tacci, etc.

5. "Beatification" is the declaration by the pope as head of the Church that one of its members deserves for saintly life as confessor or heroic death as martyr, to be entitled Blessed, that is, regarded as dwelling in the happi­ness of heaven. The declaration is preceded by a double process, the first consisting of an examination at the diocesan level into the life, virtues, writings, and reputation for holiness, or martyrdom, of the Servant of God in question, conducted ordinarily by the bishop of the place in which he or she died or lived a long time. The second process, known as the apostolic process, is instituted by the Holy See in case the first inquiry shows that there is a likelihood of proving that the Servant of God practiced virtue to an heroic degree.

6. Ibid., p.491; the author was an eye-witness of the examination of the saint's body. In fact, the body had not been embalmed, following the testament of Pius X. Cf. Chiron, Saint Pius X, p.342; Angelus Press edition, p.304.

7. On this occasion was published the apostolic letter, Adperpetuam rei memoriam, Quoniam Christus, followed by an allocution in Italian, both found in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 43 (June 22-July 2 1951), no. 9-10, pp.462-468 and 468-476; Documentation catholique, no. 1097, June 17,1951 (33^rd year, tome 48), col. 706-714 and 714-720; the Italian text was published in Osservatore Romano, June 4-5, 1951.

8. Pius V (1566-1572) was canonized in 1712 by Clement XL Pius XII speaks of the great favor he has been given in being allowed to beatify the "pontiff whom We Ourselves knew, whose great virtues We have admired firsthand, whom We have served with piety and devotion: Pope Pius X," in the apostolic letter Quoniam Christus, July 3,1951 (Documentation catholique, No.109, col. 714).

9. E Supremi Apostolatus, encyclical letter of October 4, 1903. French text from the Documents Pontificaux de S.S. Saint Pie X (Versailles: Courrier de Rome, 1993, tome 1, pp.33-41).

10. See the discourse announcing the program of Cardinal Sarto, when he took possession of the patriarchal see of Venice (1894). Cf. Pierre Fernessole in Pie X, essai historique, tome I (Paris: Lethielliuex, 1952), p. 126. Cf. the exhortation Haerent Animo, August 4, 1908, and the encyclical Acerbo Nimis, April 15, 1905.

12. Translator's note: The decree Non Expedit ("It is not expedient") forbade Italian Catholics from participating in the Freemasonic government of the Kingdom of Italy, even by voting in parliamentary elections, a government which was established in 1861 and eventually seized Rome and the papal states, while instituting anti-Catholic laws. Pius XI signed a Concordat with Mussolini in 1929, re-establishing relations between the Church and the Italian government.

13. Osservatore Romano, September 2, 1951.

14. Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, January 17, 1954 in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, March 18 1954. Cf. Documentation catholique no. 1175, June 13, 1954 (36^th year, tome 51, col. 717-718).

15. The texts associated with this canonization were In solemni canonizatione, vespere diet XXIX mail mensis; an allocution in Italian, May 29; the allo­cution Si diligis...pasce, May 31; see the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 46 (June 30, 1954), no. 8, pp.306-317; Documentation catholique no. 1175, col. 711-716.

16. Angelicum, (Rome, 1946), 2 (July-December),  pp.126-145.

17. Une ecole de theologie: le Saulchoir, 1937; condemned in 1942. Chenu was thereafter removed from his function as director of studies.

Translator's note: The Library of the Saulchoir ("garden of willows"), and later the Center of Studies under the same name, were under the direction of the Dominicans of the Province of France since the middle of the 19th century. Under the anti-clerical laws at the end of that century and the beginning of the 20th, the religious were obliged to seek exile; they found themselves in Belgium for the first half of the 20th century, at a former Cistercian monastery, le Saulchoir. Fr. Chenu inspired a renewal of theo­logical studies meant to integrate dogmatic theology, history, sociology, and the exact sciences—psychoanalysis was eventually added to the "cur­riculum."

18. Pius XII spoke to the bishops who had come to Rome to render "a tribute of admiration and of honor" to Pius X.

19. It is interesting to recall that wherever he was assigned, he reformed the diocesan statutes, after having held and organized synods (Mantua, Venice, Rome).

20. Here Pius XII cites the first encyclical of Benedict XV, which solemnly renewed the condemnation of modernism (November 1, 1914).

21. "This latter consists in the power to accomplish the sacrifice of Christ Himself because one represents Christ, the High Priest."

22. Encyclical Singulari Quadam, September 24, 1912.

23. No. 32, 1954, pp.34-47.

24. He responded in the same publication, La Pensee Catholique, no. 39,1955. See also Congar, Journald'un theologien, p.392, n. 111.

25. In Sacerdoce et laicat dans I'Eglise, M.J. Congar and F. Varillon (Paris: Editions du Vitrail, 1947), 62 pages.

26. In Le sacerdoce royal des fideles dans les Livres Saints (Paris: Bloud, 1942).

27. Yves Congar, Journal d'un theologien 1946-1956 (Paris: Cerf, 2001), pp.247-248, including note 141.

28. To Rouen, Dijon, Melun, and Jerusalem, respectively (by a convocation of the Father General, February 8, 1954, to the convent of Faubourg Saint-Honore). Cf. Une vie pour la verite: Jean Puyo interroge le Pere Congar (Le Centurion, 1975), p.108. Congar returned to France mid-September 1954, was convoked by the Holy Office before being exiled to Cambridge (February 1956), and finally assigned to the convent of Strasburg. Cf. Yves Congar, Une passion: I'unite (Paris: Cerf/ Foi Vivante, 1974) p.77, "Les annees sombres."

29. Cf. the quarrels surrounding the school of Fourviere and its illustrious representative, Fr. Henri de Lubac, another future cardinal.

30. Une vie pour la verite, pp. 102-117.

31. Yves-Marie Congar and Bernard Lauret, Entretiens d 'Automne (Paris: Cerf, 1987), p.81.

32. Etienne Fouilloux, Une Eglise en quete de liberte, la pensee catholique franfaise entre modernisme et Vatican 11,1914-1962 (Bruges: Desclee de Brouwer, 1998), ch.l, p.33.

33. Fr. Luc. J. Lefevre, La Pensee Catholique, no. 19, 1951.

"God is good." The expression has for become banal having been so often repeated, at least for those who have not yet understood that the qualities of God are never tainted with banality because of their intensity.

"God is intensely good." The expression applies most particularly to Christ on the Cross. "Dukes davos—Sweet the nails." There is no need to use complicated words.

Gratuity and perfection are the two characteristics of a good action. We stoop to help someone who is miserable, expecting no reward. We stoop down to them with the most perfect simplicity possible, without which, rather than being good, we would be insolent. Goodness begins when we endeavor in all sincerity to put ourselves by our thoughts and actions in the place of the one we would help.

Christ put Himself entirely in our place.

We were the ones who should have been in that place, but we had none of what it would take to hold it. Our corrupted sentiments would not have known how to touch God. Our courage is short-lived, and we would have lost heart....

Then Jesus stepped forward.

"Let Me take their place, the place they should have occupied in the face of Your justice. You love Me; You will accept My apology."

The place was so well taken that He occupied it in the name of each and every one of us: our place. Through Him, God received the homage, repentance, and promises that justice required us to express, but which we could never have found in our memory or our heart to tell Him ourselves had He not come.

He was astonishingly good to us.

He deliberately thought of each of our faults. He deliberately accepted the suffering due to each one, and He accepted that suffering with perfect submission.

For each one of our stupid mistakes, He talked things over with God and knew just how to reach an "understanding" with the Father so that the affair could simply be dropped.

To each "objection" of Divine reasoning, He was able to respond:" I did reparation for them; it has been taken care of; let's not mention it.... I loved You for them."

Gratuity of Goodness.

And He took our place absolutely.

Think.The courage of Jesus in doing absolute reparation for our stupid mistakes. Not a single one escaped Him. He fulfilled His mission so conscientiously, with such awareness and such courage, that there is not a single one of our faults able to resist His Blood. He erases them absolutely; He does reparation for them absolutely.

The thought should inspire us with such gratitude and move us to tell Him thank you for His immense goodness to each one of us.

He did what we would have desired to do though we were without the capacity of doing it.

In Heaven, we will see which of His moans of pain earned us the desire to change. We will see which of His silences earned us the strength to confess. We will see which of the insults He accepted merited for us a longed-for humility. We will see which of His wounds was our wound-the wound for us; the wound because of us.

We will understand that all of our progress, our inspirations, and our efforts come from this source, that we owe them to Him, to His Goodness. And we will fall over ourselves to tell Him: "Thank You! Thank You! You were so good to me, who had been so slow to understand and so willful."

How His goodness should give us confidence because we can be sure of Him, though we are not sure of ourselves. Come and find Him as often as you need Him. He welcomes with goodness. We are sure of His compassion for us on account of His own Passion. He listens to us with kindness.

We are sure of Him. What a grace in a human life-to be sure of someone!

By His Passion, He enters into our weakness and misery in order to give them a meaning full of hope and a reason for us not to lose heart, since our very wretchedness earned us the example of such great courage.

"The goodness of Our Lord crucified, immobilized by the nails so that we might always come to Him. I have so many reasons to be grateful to You, and my gratitude fills me with reasons to give myself over to Your immeasurable Goodness."

Translated from the French exclusively for Angelus Press. First published as La Bonte de Dieu in Les Cahiers de Contravenes, No.2, June, 1994, pp.31-32. Expect to see more of Fr. Chivré's meditations in future issues of The Angelus.

A Spiritual Father for Our Century

For the joy and consolation it will bring to those who knew him (1902-84), for the younger generation who only knew him by his reputation, and for the sake of justice to honor a great and noble religious who passed through our vulgar and thankless age, I cannot resist this opportunity to tell what I remember of Fr. de Chivré (say: Sheave-ray'). His own words present him best: "I know I could have had an incredible apostolate, but God preferred an incredible sacrifice, and it's much better that way."

He was born of one of the oldest and most noble families of France. As early as 800, history speaks of the first Baron de Chivré. Father never boasted of his origins; he accepted them as a great responsibility before God. He was tall, with chiseled features, and a certain modest dignity in his bearing. What he loved more than anything was nobility of character. He was noble in every sense of the word, but he tried to hide his natural dignity behind the voluntary humility of a Catholic and a religious. Sometimes, though, his quick and vehement nature got the better of him when he met with dishonesty or cowardice, and he could not always contain his indignation before a certain baseness of character.

After the World War I (which struck down his elder brother, voluntarily engaged at 18), he entered the novitiate of the Dominican Fathers of the Province of France. But the modernist spirit had already begun to infect the Order, and the combat began for him at an early hour. But there was no question of fleeing the battlefield. He held strong, and fought every inch of the way to remain faithful to his vocation. There were times when indignation or discouragement seemed almost to pull him under, but his strong desire to be a Dominican brought him through every trial. He was persecuted by his professors at the Dominican college of the Saulchoir, not openly—perhaps not even deliberately—but two radically opposed mentalities could not help but collide.

His personal notes give a hint of these confrontations. They are more eloquent than if I were to describe his hidden suffering and the energy he deployed to overcome it:

The man who has wept is like the land after a rain: he is soothed; the earth of his soul has been overturned. The brightness of interior light comes to shine like the sun over his moistened heart, and a springtime of new energies bring his life new reasons to sing.

Oh! Above all, never speak of the beauty that sings to your soul....You will only meet more sarcasm....Stay buried in your shroud, and make sure that nothing of the real you can seep through. You have grown so used to this shroud that it will probably only come off at the resurrection. Then the songs of your heart and mind will burst forth, but for now the order of the day is the hardening of the reason and the heart: that's the modern way to be someone.

I rejoice—supernaturally, but also humanly—at the thought of those who have been fortunate enough to be loved by their brothers. Others have never known that balm of authentic affection which renews the forces of the soul, exhausted by interminable solitude. These, without ever speaking of it, associate themselves with the joy of their brothers by a prayer of thanksgiving uttered in their name. I need to accept the fact that I am not loved because of the ideas that I love and because of the ideal that has always inspired me. When you cling to the Truth you divorce yourself from a great many people. As soon as a soul gives itself fully to God, those who are most furiously bent on destroying it are those who have unknowingly conserved the roots of the spirit of the world, buried deep in their flawless piety.

"Yes, My God"-the phrase is truly an echo of the Consecration. It is brief and full of mystery like the Consecration, containing the infinite variety of reasons to pronounce it, just as the Host contains the infinity of God through the Hoc est corpus meum-simple and direct like the Consecration. It is a simple little expression that opens the door to unimaginable acts of courage- "Yes, My God!"

Spending several days with other souls in an entirely spiritual atmosphere, knowing that every one of you is in pursuit of God and His light and that you have come together for the sole end of coming to know Him better; living in an ambiance of silence—an atmosphere of joy without words and words without excess; living moments of profound conversation that are the sincere echo of our conscience and of those regions of the soul which are nearest eternity and which only rarely are drawn to the surface of daily existence: those days seem to be already Heaven, or at least its ante-chamber.

Our Lady of the Granite is on the front ranks of the battle, in everything that the Annunciation of the Angel sought in the soul of the Virgin.

Blessed be God who led us to Rev. Fr. de Chivré and by him shed light on our path.

Thank you to Fr. de Chivré for having given back to us the sense of mystery, as opposed to the spiritual darkness of modern thought.

First, homage and thanksgiving to Him, to whom you have given yourself without reserve so that His priesthood might take possession of you so that you no longer express anything but Him! Homage to her, our Virginal Mother, to whom you confided your priesthood and who was able to make it bear fruit for the benefit of the souls who owe you their salvation and who will tell you so for all eternity! Homage to you, Father, truly the Father of our souls, of our minds, and of our hearts, and thank you for all the future priests who owe it to you to have understood what a priest should be, even before you spoke a word to them!

One great theme dominates and explains the life of the priest-to be a second humanity for Jesus Christ and continue His work of redemption. With the Mass, at every absolution and baptism, the life of the priest and all of his time are spent lending Christ his soul, his heart, his intelligence, his emotions, his lips, his hands, his body. Now we see this same priest objecting at the approach of death, astonished at such a sacrifice—the very sacrifice he had so often preached to others. His life was one continuous priestly action, fertile in sacrifice, in prayer, in expiation, in apostolate. His life was not tainted with the cowardice of fleeing Christ by selfishness or worldliness—and now he may fail to turn his death into the ultimate act of the priesthood. His death may slip through the hands of Christ, with no priestly value at all. When our own time finally comes, we always find that it is a little too soon, that the Church of God has a particular need of us right now, that there are still so many things to do....

Let us therefore ask God that our death may be a priestly act even more than was our life, that imitating the death of Christ, our own may be a sacrifice and the fulfillment of all our dreams when we longed to give ourselves. May our death be far superior to all the sanctity and the redemptive value of our life. May we live like Jesus Christ and die like Jesus Christ.

Have we ever realized the fact that the life of Jesus, which was infinitely pure, detached, devoted, patient, and good, was not judged by Him to be entirely redemptive until it was consummated by the immolation of all His being in death?-a consummation of purity by abandoning His body; a consummation of poverty by dying naked on a cross; a consummation of devotion by dying for others; a consummation of patience by enduring everything inflicted by others; a consummation of goodness bypardoning all that they had done to Him. Like the death of Jesus, our death should be the death of a man who knows how to die; the death of someone who, knowing that these moments are to be his last, spends them with a holy precaution in order to give them the greatest possible value of adoration and redemption, such as God alone can bestow.

A value of adoration. Like Jesus, let us die to give glory to God and to bear witness to His omnipotence, as we bore witness to it all our life by serving Him and preaching Him.

Our death should be a cry of glory in honor of God: "Consummatum est....All is consummated": my childhood dreams, the hopes of my youth, my generosity as a seminarian, the joys and the tears of my priesthood: all of that, absolutely all, ought to prepare me for, draw me to, announce to me, and remind me of this invaluable instant in which, by a supreme act of love, I will bear witness to the Sovereign Power of God and His absolute rights over me, no longer by my speech but by my acceptance; no longer by my action but by abandoning myself.

This priestly act of supreme obedience and supreme abandon is higher than all the actions of my past life because a human action is always limited. It is an infinitesimal effort by which we measure not our power but our weakness. Yet, abandon touches on the infinite. There is something limitless in abandon-limitless in time, limitless in the face of the unknown, limitless before the means God will use. We no longer choose, we accept. We no longer have what we prefer, we receive. We no longer calculate, we give. ''''Consummatum est... All is consummated"-The priesthood cannot go any farther than that. In our life we used our priesthood for the greater glory of God, with our limited means. At our death, we let it take possession of our being without the interference of our own opinions. The fullness and the perfection of the priesthood can then act in us to the full, thanks to our acceptance of death in total liberty.

A value of redemption.In his life and in his death, the priest no longer belongs to himself, and he does not have the right to die for himself alone. He must not steal his death from the world which is standing in wait to benefit from the death of a priest as from a new Calvary. The world needs priestly deaths that are priestly in every way—I mean deaths offered like a final Mass for the intention of our own personal debts in order that, once we have been purified by this sentiment of expiation, our other intentions might acquire an irresistible value of supplication before the eyes of God. My role as a redeemer will not be complete unless I accept my death out of love, as a final action for all the souls that have been confided to me during my life, that is, a final expiation for the sins I have heard-"Father, forgive them..."; a final act of love against all the apostasies I have encountered- "Sitio....! thirst"; a final act of redemption for the souls that our efforts tried in vain to save-" [I] fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for His body, which is the church:...."

A second humanity in life, and a second humanity in death: such is the priest.

Let us prepare our death by living according to a deeply sincere desire to be a second humanity for Jesus Christ. Let us live for Him without being surprised or discouraged at our weakness, and with a renewed intention to carry this resemblance to Our Lord into the details of every day to the greatest degree possible—into the life of our mind and our affections, and even into our material life. Then, if we are already detached, our death will only be the continuation of our priestly life- more perfect, more complete, and more holy.

The death of a priest is the consummation of an act of love that began on the day when a voice without words—but not without echo—whispered to us: "Come, follow Me, leaving your boat and your nets...." And then, "Come, follow Me because evening is coming for you, giving you one more reason to follow Me with a redoubled faith, the confidence of a child, and a generosity worthy of My own. The hour has come when you will no longer act, but will let Me act through the redemptive acceptance of your death."

Translated exclusively from the French by Angelus Press. The author is anonymous. First published as "Temoignage" in Le R.P. de Chivré, Frere Precheur: Unpere spiritual pour le XXeme siecle, from the Cahiers, No. 2 of the magazine Controverses, 1994, pp. 9-22.

Since its doors were always open, only Fr. de Chivre would have been able to guess at how many people came through Ecalles-Alix. After his death in 1984, it was returned to its owners, then sold. Fr. Chivre is buried in the cemetery of the Basilica at Rouen among his Dominican confreres.

The Goodness Of God
Fr. Bernard-Marie de Chivré, O.P.

"God is good." The expression has for become banal having been so often repeated, at least for those who have not yet understood that the qualities of God are never tainted with banality because of their intensity.

"God is intensely good." The expression applies most particularly to Christ on the Cross. "Dukes davos—Sweet the nails." There is no need to use complicated words.

Gratuity and perfection are the two characteristics of a good action. We stoop to help someone who is miserable, expecting no reward. We stoop down to them with the most perfect simplicity possible, without which, rather than being good, we would be insolent. Goodness begins when we endeavor in all sincerity to put ourselves by our thoughts and actions in the place of the one we would help.

Christ put Himself entirely in our place.

We were the ones who should have been in that place, but we had none of what it would take to hold it. Our corrupted sentiments would not have known how to touch God. Our courage is short-lived, and we would have lost heart....

Then Jesus stepped forward.

"Let Me take their place, the place they should have occupied in the face of Your justice. You love Me; You will accept My apology."

The place was so well taken that He occupied it in the name of each and every one of us: our place. Through Him, God received the homage, repentance, and promises that justice required us to express, but which we could never have found in our memory or our heart to tell Him ourselves had He not come.

He was astonishingly good to us.

He deliberately thought of each of our faults. He deliberately accepted the suffering due to each one, and He accepted that suffering with perfect submission.

For each one of our stupid mistakes, He talked things over with God and knew just how to reach an "understanding" with the Father so that the affair could simply be dropped.

To each "objection" of Divine reasoning, He was able to respond:" I did reparation for them; it has been taken care of; let's not mention it.... I loved You for them."

Gratuity of Goodness.

And He took our place absolutely.

Think.The courage of Jesus in doing absolute reparation for our stupid mistakes. Not a single one escaped Him. He fulfilled His mission so conscientiously, with such awareness and such courage, that there is not a single one of our faults able to resist His Blood. He erases them absolutely; He does reparation for them absolutely.

The thought should inspire us with such gratitude and move us to tell Him thank you for His immense goodness to each one of us.

He did what we would have desired to do though we were without the capacity of doing it.

In Heaven, we will see which of His moans of pain earned us the desire to change. We will see which of His silences earned us the strength to confess. We will see which of the insults He accepted merited for us a longed-for humility. We will see which of His wounds was our wound-the wound for us; the wound because of us.

We will understand that all of our progress, our inspirations, and our efforts come from this source, that we owe them to Him, to His Goodness. And we will fall over ourselves to tell Him: "Thank You! Thank You! You were so good to me, who had been so slow to understand and so willful."

How His goodness should give us confidence because we can be sure of Him, though we are not sure of ourselves. Come and find Him as often as you need Him. He welcomes with goodness. We are sure of His compassion for us on account of His own Passion. He listens to us with kindness.

We are sure of Him. What a grace in a human life-to be sure of someone!

By His Passion, He enters into our weakness and misery in order to give them a meaning full of hope and a reason for us not to lose heart, since our very wretchedness earned us the example of such great courage.

"The goodness of Our Lord crucified, immobilized by the nails so that we might always come to Him. I have so many reasons to be grateful to You, and my gratitude fills me with reasons to give myself over to Your immeasurable Goodness."

Translated from the French exclusively for Angelus Press. First published as La Bonte de Dieu in Les Cahiers de Contravenes, No.2, June, 1994, pp.31-32. Expect to see more of Fr. Chivré's meditations in future issues of The Angelus.

One of the readers of The Angelus recently visited Mission San Juan Capistrano in California where the pictures on the following pages were taken. The collection encouraged the story which accompanies them.

The mission was one of those established by the Franciscan Friars Minor and Jesuit missionaries which, starting in 1683, became a string of priories on the west coast of the North American continent divided into what was known as Lower or Old California and Upper California. The former were located in today's Mexico; the latter in the present State of California. They doubled as presidios-or forts-by which Spain defended her claims of discovery against the threat from Russia who showed desire for the possessions.

St. John Capistran (1385-1456). At age 70, a year before his death, this Franciscan was commissioned by Pope Callistus II to rally Christendom against the Moslems raiding Vienna. Here he is pictured with his breastplate, on the battlefield.

In 1769, Fr. Junfpero Serra, O.F.M. (1713-84) founded Mission San Diego. This was the first of the missions in Upper California which would eventually form a chain of 21 extending all the way to today's Sonoma, California (north of San Francisco), a distance of about 600 miles.

One hundred and forty-six Friars Minor ministered in Upper California from 1769 to 1845, mostly priests and Spanish-born. Sixty-seven died at their posts, two as martyrs. The others retired to their motherhouses on account of sickness or at the end of their ten-year term of service. During this time, the Fathers baptized 99,000 persons, blessed 28,000 marriages, and buried 74,000 dead. The largest number of neophytes given shelter, food, clothing, medical attention, and instruction at the 21 missions of Upper California at any one time was nearly 30,000, an average of over 1,400 per mission.

Mission San Juan Capistrano was founded twice. Owing to unrest among the Native Americans at Mission San Diego, Francisan Fr. Fermin Lasuen departed in 1775 to establish another mission roughly halfway between Mission San Diego and Mission San Gabriel (in today's Los Angeles metroplex) located 125 miles to the north. Says one historian of the natives of San Diego, "In all the missionary annals of the northwest [of the North American continent] there is no other instance where paganism remained stubborn for so long." In October of 1775, Fr. Lasuen planted a large cross and dedicated ground in honor of St. John Capistran, the Italian theologian and inquisitor of the 14th century who was responsible for rallying Christendom to make its historic and desperate defense against the Moslems at the gates of Vienna. Over the next eight days, timber was cut for the building of a temporary chapel and dwellings. But all halted when word reached Mission San Juan Capistrano that Mission San Diego had suffered an Indian attack. Fearing that it would be next, the small party at San Juan Capistrano buried the bells and fled 60 miles south to take shelter at Mission San Diego.

The "Serra Chapel." This was the first church constructed at the mission (1776-78). It is the only remaining mission chapel where Fr. Junipero Serra celebrated Mass. The altar came from Barcelona, Spain and is estimated to be 350 years old.

After a year's delay, Fr. Junipero Serra returned to the same site with two Franciscans and an escort of soldiers. On All Saints' Day, November 1, 1776, Mission San Juan Capistrano was officially dedicated. Within a year, the first little church was built. It is the oldest church in California and is still in use today. It is called the "Serra Chapel" because Fr. Serra celebrated Mass here.

The mission-plan was to build adobe buildings, generally in a square, with the church in one of the corners. Adjoining it was the missionaries' quarters, off limits to women and girls. The sides and rear of the square enclosed a courtyard and contained shops, storerooms, and apartments. The apartments where the girls stayed were called the monjerio or nunnery. Due to the carnal inclination of the natives, unmarried girls of 12 and older lived here pretty much like those in a boarding school, overseen by a matron. Unmarried young men lived similarly in another section and were cared for by the missionaries. When a young man wished to marry, he made his selection from among the girls. If the padre consented, they were married and assigned a home in the mission village.

The Indians of each mission had a different language, and frequently several dialects were spoken among those of a single mission. The Friars had to become expert linguists to communicate the Faith. To insure regular attendance and prevent backsliding, the Fathers persuaded the Indians to leave their desert or mountain hovels and live at the mission. Those that did not, once baptized, were not allowed to go back to their pagan homes without permission from the missionaries. Whole neophyte families lived in the shadow of the mission.

Morning and evening prayers were said in common in the church. All assisted at Mass. Breakfast was followed by labor suited for men, women, and children. Lunch in common, then a siesta, followed by work until the Angelus, when supper was eaten. The cool evening hours were given to amusements, especially music and playful dancing.

A United States government report (1852) says the Franciscans had turned the Indians into

masons, carpenters, plasterers, soapmakers, tanners, shoemakers, blacksmiths, millers, bakers, cooks, brickmakers, cartmakers, weavers and spinners, saddlers, shepherds, agriculturists, herdsmen, vintagers, in a word, they filled all the occupations known to civilized society.

Remains of the Great Stone Church that was dedicated in 1806.

[The mission system] was the most just, humane, and equitable system ever devised for the treatment of an aboriginal people.

Current parish church facing original mission grounds.

Photographs by Troy Cox, who assists at the Latin Mass at Our Lady of the Angels, Arcadia, California.

In Fatima, Portugal, on October 13, 1917, Lucia, Francisco, and Jacinta saw the Holy Family. St. Joseph held the Child Jesus in his arms. Both were arrayed in red robes and stood at the left of the sun. The right hand of each was raised, blessing with the sign of the cross which both did three times over the 70,000 people gathered that day. At the right side of the sun was Our Lady in a white garment with a sky-blue mantle. The Child Jesus appeared to be about two years old.

Lucia afterwards saw the Sorrowful Mother of God and Our Lady of Mt. Carmel after which came the renowned "Miracle of the Sun," a sign given to mankind in this apocalyptic age which may be nearing the end times.

The fact that St. Joseph and the Child Jesus were blessing with a sign of the cross is very meaningful and important. This emphasizes the fact that St. Joseph has a very important place in the redemption of mankind and our individual salvation. This vision granted to the children at Fatima had as its purpose to persuade us to develop a piety towards St. Joseph in our life and give him the place that God the Father wishes us to give him. This is because St. Joseph is the lawful foster father of Jesus and as this he is a reflection of God's Fatherhood for all mankind and every parent.

Hierarchy of Persons and Authority

According to the hierarchy of persons in the Holy Family, Our Lord Jesus had first place, Mary second, and St. Joseph third. But according to hierarchy of authority, St. Joseph as lawful husband and father of the family had first place, Mary second, and Jesus Christ, Child of Mary and foster son of St. Joseph, third place.

Why is hierarchy of authority so important in our Catholic families? The life of the Church Militant is warfare. This warfare is the life of every Catholic and Catholic family that wishes to go to heaven. Every army has its general, its officers, and its common soldiers. Among them must be a strong hierarchy of authority, and without it no army can hope to win in battle.

Catholic families must be united in fighting for their earthly survival in service of the salvation of all the members of that family. Enemies which threaten this earthly survival and resulting salvation are hell, a godless world, and the very sinfulness of the members of any family. If a family wants to wage effective warfare and win this life or death battle for salvation, there must be, as in the best armies, a strong hierarchy of authority. God established such hierarchy when He gave the family a father to be its head. As exemplified by the hierarchy of authority in the Holy Family, the wife follows him, and the children come after her. Only by upholding and living this hierarchy of authority can a family survive and be redeemed.

Hell wants to destroy hierarchy of authority for it is exactly this which enables the family to successfully fight and binds its members in loving and respectful harmony and concord. By announcing its deceitful motto of equality of authority between father, mother, and children, Hell destroys the family. Mothers become breadwinners (out of greed), children are sent to surrogate mothers, and fathers give up their authority to the godless State. To further destroy the family Hell propagates contraception, divorce, abortion, euthanasia, nursing homes for the elders, and equality of heirs resulting in single-generation families and destruction of family possessions.

Numerous used to be the multi-generational Catholic families of Christendom which were the foundation cells of the Catholic Church and Catholic States. Without such Catholic States, there can be no true or lasting peace nor normalcy of life. God only blesses where there is the true Faith and life in obedience to God's commandments.

Significance of the Vision

Recall that in the vision by the Fatima seers, Jesus was held by St. Joseph and both offered blessing to the world by the sign of the cross. Recall that the Blessed Virgin Mary promised that true world peace would be established if Russia were consecrated to her Immaculate Heart by the Pope in union with the world's bishops. What role has St. Joseph in all this? I believe his help invaluable.

Without St. Joseph protecting her, Our Lady might not have brought Our Lord Jesus Christ to the light of day nor would she have been able to live safely with Him. Perhaps the accomplishment of Our Lord's mission might have been threatened. God prepared St. Joseph from eternity to be the holy spouse and family father who made it possible for Jesus and Mary to fulfill their missions.

The task of St. Joseph 2,000 years ago continues today. Without him there will be no consecration of Russia and no peace in the world. We must return him to his rightful place in the plan of salvation which God's Providence has given him. In the same manner, we must re-establish authority to fathers and husbands, otherwise families will not live in a holy manner nor walk the path leading to heaven.

We recognize the Sacred Heart of Jesus by its cross, wound, the crown of thorns encircling it, and its flames of charity's fire. The Heart of Our Lady is usually encircled with flowers-though at Fatima with thorns-and pierced with a sword, and even sometimes seven of them. Radiating from her Heart are flames of charity similar to those pouring from the Sacred Heart. This is the case also with the Heart of St. Joseph (see Fr. Podržaj's homemade holy card, p. 17) from which appear flames symbolizing his pure and dutiful love for the Trinity, the Holy Family, and mankind itself. The most recognizable and characteristic sign of the Heart of this Patriarch of patriarchs is the golden anchor figured within it, a symbol of the theological virtue of Hope. A cross is the symbol of Faith (Our Lord Jesus Christ), a heart is a symbol of Charity (the Virgin Mary), and an anchor for St. Joseph is the symbol of Hope, which connects Faith to Love. St. Joseph is also patron of the dying. In our last hour, hope in the mercy of God is important and decisive for all eternity. The anchor is gold in color to symbolize eternity and indestructibility.

As it is impossible to separate the three Persons of the Holy Trinity, so it is impossible to separate the three Hearts of the Holy Family-Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. We honor all three of them, recommend them, ought to consecrate ourselves to them, and follow their examples to repair for our sins and those of others.

St. Joseph, Pillar of Families

May husbands and fathers of families consecrate themselves to St. Joseph under his title of "Pillar of Families," that they may know how to be pillars and heads of numerous strong and invincible Catholic families, the foundation of a healthy Catholic Church and State. No house should be without a picture or a statue of St. Joseph nor should a day pass that we don't recommend ourselves to his patronage. Along with St. Michael the Archangel, St. Joseph is co-patron of the universal Catholic Church. As he cared for the Head of the Catholic Church in His lifetime, let us go confidently now to him in these confused times asking his intercession for the Mystical Body, in favor of the Latin Mass, Catholic doctrine, and Catholic morality.

An interview with Fr. Vidko Podržaj is featured in the expanded edition of Priest, Where is thy Mass?-Mass, Where is thy Priest? A picture taken of Fr. Podržaj from the priestly ordinations of 2002 (St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, Winona, Minnesota) is circled on the cover.

St. Joseph, the King

St. Joseph was of the tribe of David, the kingly line of Israel. As the lawful husband of the Virgin Mary and foster father of Jesus Christ, the King of all kings, so St. Joseph also can be logically understood as a king of heaven and earth, angels and saints. In the Canon of the Mass he is mentioned immediately after Jesus and Mary and before the Apostles and the other saints. We can presume that in heaven the hierarchies of both persons and authority are still in full force, so St. Joseph still remains the head of the Holy Family but now, by spiritual adoption, with more children.

When Our Lord Jesus Christ from the Cross gave His mother to be the spiritual mother to everyone who receives Him as Redeemer in the Catholic Church, by this act He gave also St. Joseph to be a spiritual father to everyone who desires to become and remain a child of God. The Virgin Mary of Fatima told Jacinta that most souls go to hell because of their sins of impurity. St. Joseph is named by the Church to be a special intercessor for the preservation of holy purity, virginity, and baptismal innocence.

Let us be confident in the Heart of St. Joseph given confidently by the heavenly Father to the foster father and patron of His only-begotten Son. Let us be aware that we are never orphans on this earth despite family circumstances of yesterday or today. Let us pray that the paternal Heart of St. Joseph be acknowledged by more of our fellowmen. No one on earth can say that they are not in need of the boundlessly compassionate Hearts of Mother Mary and Father Joseph-these two Hearts which are the reflection of the infinitely loving and compassionate Sacred Heart of the Second Person of the Trinity.

Let us choose irrevocably this good father to be our Protector and to help us restore our families. Dedicate to His paternal and just Heart yourselves, your families, and countrymen.

Fr. Vidko Podržaj was born in Slovenia which is on the Adriatic Sea, east of Italy (75 miles from Venice) and northwest of Croatia. He was born in 1959 and ordained in 1994. He celebrates exclusively the Latin Mass in his home country after having made an extended stay at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, Winona, Minnesota.

According To Pascendi Gregis

We wish to honor Pope St. Pius X, the first canonized pontiff that the good Lord gave us since St. Pius V, by remembering his teachings. The task is not easy, since the teachings of his 11-year pontificate are abundant: his Catechism;¹ frequent Communion² and at an earlier age;³ Catholic Action;⁴ devotion to Our Lady;⁵ the responsibility of those who govern the Church;⁶ the Priesthood;⁷ the doctrine of St. Thomas of Aquinas⁸ and that of many others.

Some of the most interesting of St. Pius X's teachings to recall are those on Modernism. The three documents vital to the subject are Lamentabili Sane (July 3, 1907), Pascendi Dominici Gregis (Sept. 8, 1907), and Sacrorum Antistitum (Sept. 1, 1910). Without any doubt, the most well-known aspect of this teaching on Modernism is the description that St. Pius X gives of the successive faces of the Modernist: the philosopher, believer, theologian, critic, apologist, and reformer. It is a long and arduous text that measures up to the challenge which confronted the Church and its magisterium.

As for us, we will emphasize what St. Pius X wrote on the tactics of the Modernists. The holy Pope was worried not only about the doctrinal aspects of this question, but also about the progress of this error in minds and hearts. How could a doctrine so complex, overwhelming, and contrary to the natural structure of human intelligence have such dissemination? How can we justify all the new measures taken by the Pope-Anti-Modernist Oath, vigilance counsels, exclusion of Modernists from the priesthood and teaching positions, prohibition to publish, control over priestly conventions-knowing that the Church always had to fight against one heresy or other in the course of its history? Why such particular treatment? From the very beginning of his encyclical on Modernism, St. Pius X said:

Still it must be confessed that the number of the enemies of the Cross of Christ has in this days increased exceedingly, who are striving, by arts, entirely new and full of subtlety, to destroy the vital energy of the Church, and, if they can, to overthrow utterly Christ's kingdom itself.⁹

That we make no delay in this matter is rendered necessary especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; they lie hid, a thing to be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart, and are the more mischievous, the less conspicuous they appear.¹⁰

[W]e allude...to many who belong to the Catholic laity, nay, and this is far more lamentable, to the ranks of the priesthood itself,...and lost to all sense of modesty, vaunt themselves as reformers of the Church.

...And this policy they follow willingly and wittingly, both because it is part of their system that authority is to be stimulated but not dethroned, and because it is necessary for them to remain within the ranks of the Church in order that they may gradually transform the collective conscience-thus unconsciously avowing that the common conscience is not with them, and that they have no right to claim to be its interpreters.¹¹

Moreover they lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fires. And having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to disseminate poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic Truth from which they hold their hand, none that they do not strive to corrupt.¹²

Certainly this suffices to show superabundantly by how many roads Modernism leads to the annihilation of all religion. The first step in this direction was taken by Protestantism; the second is made by Modernism; the next will plunge headlong into atheism.¹³

And now, can anybody who takes a survey of the whole system be surprised that We should define it as the synthesis of all heresies? Were one to attempt the task of collecting together all the errors that have been broached against the faith and to concentrate the sap and substance of them all into one, he could no better succeed than the Modernists have done.¹⁴

Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil; it is law to itself, and suffices, by its natural forces, to secure the welfare of men and nations. (Condemned Propostion No. 3)

For they double the part of the rationalist and Catholic, and this so craftily that they easily lead the unwary into error.¹⁵

Hence, in their books you find some things that might well be expressed by a Catholic, but in the next page you will find other things which might have been dictated by a rationalist.¹⁶

It must be first noted that every Modernist sustains and comprises within himself many personalities: he is a philosopher, a believer, a theologian, an historian, a critic, an apologist, a reformer. These roles must be clearly distinguished from one another by all who would accurately know their system and thoroughly comprehend the principles and consequences of their doctrines.¹⁷

But since the Modernists...employ a very clever artifice, namely, to present their doctrines without order and systematic arrangement into one whole, scattered and disjointed one from another, so as to appear to be in doubt and uncertainty, while in reality they are firm and steadfast, it will be of ad vantage... to bring their teachings together here into one group, and to point out the connection between them, and thus to pass an examination of the sources of the errors, and to prescribe remedies for averting the evil.¹⁸

In the writing and addresses they seem not infrequently to advocate now one doctrine now another so that one would be disposed to regard them as vague and doubtful. But there is a reason for this, and it is to be found in their ideas as to the mutual separation of science and faith.¹⁹

It may be...that some may think We have dwelt too long on this exposition of the doctrines of the Modernists. But it was necessary, both in order to refute their customary charge that We do not understand their ideas, and to show that their system does not consist in scattered and unconnected theories but in a perfectly organized body, all the parts of which are solidly joined so that it is not possible to admit one without admitting all.²⁰

But you know how fruitless has been Our action. They bowed their head for a moment but it was soon uplifted more arrogantly than ever.²¹

And thus, here again a way must be found to save the full rights of authority on the one hand and of liberty on the other. In the meanwhile the proper course for the Catholic will be to proclaim publicly his profound respect for authority-and continue to follow his own bent.²²

And so they go their own way, reprimands and condemnations notwithstanding, masking an incredible audacity under a mock semblance of humility. While they make a show of bowing their heads, their hands and minds are more intent than ever on carrying out their purposes.²³

To this must be added the fact, which indeed is well calculated to deceive souls, that they lead a life of the greatest activity, of assiduous and ardent application to every branch of learning, and that they posses, as a rule, a reputation for the strictest morality.²⁴

...[t]he boundless effrontery of these men. Let one but open his mouth and the others applaud him in chorus, proclaiming that science has made another step forward; let an outsider but hint at a desire to inspect the new discovery with his own eyes, and they are on him in a body; deny it, and you are an ignoramus; embrace and defend it, and there is no praise too warm for you. In this way they win over any who, did they but realize what they are doing, would shrink back with horror.²⁸

But of all the insults they heap on them, those of ignorance and obstinacy are the favorites. When an adversary rises up against them with an erudition and force that render him redoubtable, they try to make a conspiracy of silence around him to nullify the effects of his attacks, while in flagrant contrast with this policy towards Catholics, they load with constant praise the writers who range themselves on their side.²⁹

We must now break silence, in order to expose before the whole Church in their true colors those men who have assumed this evil disguise.³²

We wish it to be your rule first of all to tear away the mask from Freemasonry, and to let it be seen as it really is.³³

We think it is obvious to every bishop that the type of men called Modernists, whose personality was described in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, have not stopped agitating in order to disturb the peace of the Church. Nor have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group. In this way they are injecting the virus of their doctrine into the veins of Christian society, publishing books and articles either unsigned or under false names. A fresh and careful reading of Our said encyclical reveals clearly that this deliberate shrewdness is to be expected from those men We described in it. They are enemies all the more formidable as they are so close. They take advantage of their ministry by offering their poisoned food and catching the unguarded by surprise. They supply a false doctrine which is the compendium of all errors.³⁴

In the encyclical Pascendi, Pope Pius X mentioned several times and in various manners the "occult" action of Modernists. Is it a secret society in the strict sense? The encyclical Pascendi implies it though does not affirm it clearly.

Three years later, however, this formal accusation was made by Pope Pius X (Sacrorum Antistitum of Sept. 1, 1910):

"[the] Modernists, whose personality was described in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, have not stopped agitating in order to disturb the peace of the Church. Neither have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group."

...We have consulted books and magazines that gave the "history" or the "results" of Modernism since World War II: we did not find any mention of this specific aspect of the question. Not only is the secret society is omitted, but the presentation of Modernism made by many authors implicitly denied it ever existed. It is denied by the fact that their presentation of Modernism is incompatible with the existence of the secret society of Modernists. They do mention writers, investigators, editors, and clergymen undoubtedly in error, but guileless souls: certainly true for many, but insufficient to explain the historical phenomenon of Modernism. It does not explain its organized preponderance, nor the concerted campaigns, nor the medley of insults and praises, nor the premeditated tactics, nor the occult activities described in the encyclical Pascendi. Neither does it explain the accusation of "underground group" of the Motu Proprio of Sept. 1, 1910 [Sacrorum Antistitum].

All the stories of the Modernist crisis, these "analyses" of Modernism, and the judgments expressed have been radically corrupted because of the systematic ignorance and dissimulation of such an important element of judgment... By hiding the existence of the secret society, the historians obviously did not shed any light on its disappearance.

Nonetheless, this is an unresolved historical question, indeed, an open question, that is, when did the secret society of Modernists cease to exist? We cannot even ask if they were "reconstituted" at a later date, for to be reconstituted it is necessary to have ceased to exist; but we do not know if and when it was dissolved. Not only is no answer given, but the question itself is not even raised.

Historians of the crisis think that the encyclical Pascendi in 1907 mortally wounded Modernism and that that was the end of it, and even too brutal and complete of an end. That was not the position of Pope Pius X who, three years later, on Sept. 1, 1910, clearly affirmed: "Nor have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group." They had not ceased. But then, when did they cease? Or did they ever cease?³⁵

The classic heretic-Arius, Nestorius, Luther-even if he had some wistful desire to remain in the Catholic Church, did everything necessary to be ousted. He fought openly against Divine Revelation, the sacred deposit of which is guarded by the Church. The heretic, or more accurately the Modernist apostate like a Loisy or Teilhard de Chardin, deliberately rejects the whole doctrine of the Church, but desires to remain in the Church and takes the necessary measures to stay in. He dissembles and feigns with the hope of changing the Church in the long run-or, as the Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin wrote, to rectify the Faith-from the inside. The Modernist has in common with other heretics the rejection of Catholic Revelation. But he differentiates himself from other heretics, because he hides this rejection. We must insist on this: the Modernist is an apostate and a traitor.

You may ask, "Since the position of the Modernists is fundamentally disloyal, how can he keep it all his life without destroying his internal mental balance?" Is psychological balance compatible with a perpetually maintained duplicity in the most supreme questions? We must answer that yes it is, as far as the ringleaders are concerned.

With respect to the followers, the question of the psychological imbalance within a never-failing hypocrisy is less acute. When these followers are priests-alas, only too frequently-they usually end up marrying, thus putting an end to the necessity of dissimulation. For once they are married, they will continue to be apostate, but will stop being Modernists. Things become clearer with respect to them. They no longer have to fake the virtues of a Catholic priest.

Concerning the ringleaders, prelates with important charges, if they can practice their Modernism without serious damage, it is with a doubt because they are distracted by accomplices who never get tired of singing their praises. Distracted from looking at themselves, they manage to escape the burning questions of a slowly dying moral conscience.

In any case, the blindness of the mind and the hardening of the heart will always be the end of the road, but without necessarily leading to dementia. We are certain that closing oneself in spiritual darkness does not happen at once, but it is prepared slowly by numerous acts of resistance to grace. This divine chastisement is merited by numerous sins. What is more, if any other sinner can recognize himself as such and beg divine mercy, we must admit that a sinner of that type cannot convert if not for a great miracle of grace: a very rare one.

 

Translated exclusively for Angelus Press by Fr. Jaime Pazat de Lys of the Society of Saint Pius X. The author, Fr. Francis Knittel, ordained for the Society of Saint Pius X in 1989, is its District Superior of Mexico.

 

The Splendor of Our Civilization

If I have come among you it is primarily to speak of the most pressing problem of our time, which is the preservation of our Catholic Faith. I am not referring simply to certain liturgical modifications, nor to certain aspects of renewal which result from the Second Vatican Council. These details, of course, do have their importance. I am here rather to offer encouragement in the struggle to preserve the essentials of our Faith, for our Faith is vital, and before going on, I would like to bring your attention to what precisely constitutes the essentials of our Faith.

Our Lord Jesus Christ came down to earth to redeem mankind, and it was by means of the Cross that He achieved this. The central point of Christ's life on earth, the purpose for which the Son of God became man, was to die on the Cross for the salvation of all men, not only the faithful, not only Catholics, but all men. Unfortunately, not all men have accepted Christ's message, but, be they Buddhists, Moslems or Protestants, all-at least all who wish to be saved-are bound to achieve their salvation through the blood shed for them by Jesus Christ.

This, of course, is very simple for us who are Catholics. This is our Faith, the Faith we have always been taught, and yet, in our own time, how many Catholics still do accept this truth, that salvation comes to all men through Jesus Christ, that outside of Christ there is no salvation? I find it extraordinary that Catholics will question the age old adage, "No salvation outside the Church." This is precisely the most important question facing mankind today, just as it was in all ages. Indeed there is nothing more vital to man than for him to know how he is to be saved, by Whom he is to be saved, and in what manner he is to be saved. Can there possibly be a question of greater moment for those who live on earth?

Now it is quite certain that when we proclaim today that there is no salvation outside the Church, many Catholics rise up incredulously and affirm that this is nonsense, that otherwise those not in the Church must be condemned to hell. The fact is, however, that this remains a crucial tenet of interest to all mankind. As Catholics we are bound to affirm what the Church has always affirmed because the Church is the repository of all truth: God made man and the Son of God was made man to be crucified for the salvation of all men. Can there possibly be any other source of salvation outside of the Son of God, Our Lord Jesus Christ? Can we as Catholics accept that Luther, Buddha, or Mohammed are also means of eternal salvation? Are they also in Heaven seated at the right hand of God? Yet today, despite the absurdity, many Catholics no longer accept that there is no salvation outside the Church.

The Church teaches that no man is saved except through Our Lord Jesus Christ. This, as Catholics, is what we must believe, for it is what the Church has always taught. There is no other God, no other truth, no other salvation but Christ Jesus. This is the center, the foundation, the goal of our Catholic life, and it will one day be the crowning glory of our Catholic life. There is nothing outside of Christ Jesus Who is our only joy on earth and in Heaven.

You understand, I am sure, how important it is to affirm these truths. Jesus Himself, and not ourselves, chose the means for us to receive His grace. The means He chose was the Cross, and He chose that the Cross and His Sacrifice upon it be continued on earth upon our altars. There is no other place but upon our altars that Christ's Calvary is continued in this world. Catholics in every age have understood the enormity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Our ancestors most certainly understood it, our ancestors who built the worthy church buildings which adorn your country, and the extraordinary cathedrals and basilicas of Europe. Visitors the world over come to these shrines, to stand in awe before the splendor of the labor and genius of our ancestors of a thousand years ago. Why did they erect such monuments, expending decade upon decade of their fragile lives to bringing forth these magnificent cathedrals? For the sake of the altar of Our Lord Jesus Christ and for the sake of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which is celebrated upon it. And it was Christ Himself who wished it this way.

Jesus Christ instituted the priesthood at the Last Supper on the occasion of the first sacrifice-for the Last Supper, as the Council of Trent teaches, was indeed a sacrifice-when He made priests of His Apostles and enjoined them, "Do this in memory of Me." He did not say, "Tell this story. Describe this action of Mine to your children and to future generations." He said rather, "Do this, re-do this, continue to do this which I have done." It is very important that we realize the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is an action, and not a narrative, not a story. I am sure you must realize why I am emphasizing this. It is precisely because in our time Christ's intentions are being subverted, contradicted, and suppressed.

It is vital, therefore, that we insist upon what is essential to our Holy Faith and indeed to the very idea of Catholic civilization, in which we have good reason to glory still and which we hope with all our hearts to regain and to see revitalized as it was in medieval times. Today the world scorns the Middle Ages. Modern man tells us it was an age of obscurity-"the Dark Ages"-but history itself tells us the medieval age was the greatest age in history, and the 13th the greatest century that mankind has ever known.

Why? Because of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and because of the spiritual life generated by the Mass. Today more than ever before, our civilization needs its altars, needs its priests to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which in fact is a re-enactment of the Sacrifice of the Cross. The whole of Catholic civilization rests upon our altars. But if we destroy our altars and replace them with a table, and upon this table we simply prepare a meal which is but a memorial of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Last Supper, a narrative of what He said and did on that occasion, then we have forfeited the basis upon which Christian civilization rests. The Catholic Church then [if it were conceivable] would cease to exist, for the Church rests upon the dogma, upon the reality of the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar, whence comes Holy Communion, which is Our Lord Jesus Christ in His body, blood, soul and divinity. Holy Communion-the Eucharist-transforms our very souls, civilizes us, disciplines us, and imposes order upon our souls. Without the Eucharist, we reek of disorder.

We frequently wonder why there are so few priests today. It is because there is no longer any preoccupation with the Sacrifice of the Mass. There is no more ideal, no more goal for the priest to pursue. His goal had always been to go unto the altar of God to offer the Sacrifice of Calvary. That is precisely what made the sublimity of the priest, what inspired the ideal of the priestly vocation in a young man. Similarly for the religious-nuns and brothers-the fountain of their vocation was the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, just as it is for you, the laity.

What, then, precisely is a Catholic? Essentially, a Catholic is one who offers himself as a victim on the altar with Our Lord. That is what the marriage sacrament is also: a symbol of Christ's union with His Church. Just as Christ offered His life for His Church, so also do the spouses offer their lives for their families and for each other. This union is a vivid symbol of what occurred at Calvary, and thus the spouses derive the strength and courage required for the sacrifice of their union from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Without the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass there can be no Catholic spirituality, no Catholic life, and all that has been the life of the Church through the ages will simply wither and cease to exist. We, then, do have a vital requirement for the true Sacrifice of the Mass, and this is of fundamental importance to us as Catholics.

I do allow that in recent centuries our catechetics have perhaps placed more emphasis upon the Eucharist as sacrament than upon the Eucharist as sacrifice. There has been great emphasis placed on the Sacrament of the Eucharist, and for good reason, of course. We stage, for example, massive international Eucharistic Congresses throughout the Catholic world to provide the faithful with the opportunity to adore Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. And these Eucharistic Congresses were of unsurpassed splendor, living testimony of the profound belief of the faithful in the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus in the Sacrament of the Eucharist.¹

Thus, while the Church has in recent centuries placed much emphasis upon the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist-the Eucharist as Sacrament-at the same time, perhaps unconsciously, the Eucharist as Sacrifice has to some extent been neglected. Let us come back to this idea of the Eucharist as Sacrifice, without losing sight of the Eucharist as Sacrament. I do think that today there ought to be a renewed emphasis on the Eucharist as Sacrifice because, after all, it is the Eucharist as Sacrifice which is the source of the Catholic life in us, and which is also the source of the Eucharist as Sacrament. The Eucharist as Sacrament comes to us from the Sacrifice of the Cross. Without the Cross there would be no Sacrament of the Eucharist because the Sacrament is the Victim, and without the Sacrifice there is no Victim. And without the Victim there is no Real Presence, no participation, no communion by the faithful. In a word, when we receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist-Holy Communion-we are partaking of the Victim Who offered Himself on the Cross and Who offers Himself in an unbloody manner daily on our altars for the forgiveness of sins. This, then, is the profound meaning of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and of the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist: the Blessed Sacrament is the fruit of this extraordinary tree which is the Cross because the Sacrament proceeds from the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross.

We must therefore come back to this idea of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which is essential to our salvation, and see in this Sacrifice precisely that element which has been the splendor of our civilization, and to understand why, today, this civilization-Western civilization, Christian civilization-is shaken to its very foundation, how the decline of Catholic civilization began when we came to express doubts about the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist, when we began to attack, abolish, and suppress the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This incredible phenomenon traces its origins to Berengarius [a French theologian remembered for his teaching on the Eucharist, condemned by several councils -Ed] in the 11th century. Then in the 16th, Luther boldly declared that the Mass was not a Sacrifice. Luther's attack, therefore, was directed at the very heart of the Church, at its most precious dogma. And in thus undermining the Sacrifice of the Mass, he destroyed the priesthood instituted by Christ, because without the Sacrifice, what need is there for a priesthood? For what ideal does the priest strive? The priest becomes merely a functionary, designated from among the members of an assembly to offer worship, to perform a communion, to break bread.

That is what Luther achieved 450 years ago, and as those familiar with the history of his reformation will recognize, that is precisely what is happening with respect to the transformation of the liturgy in our own time. Many of the elements of change are identical. During Luther's reformation the vernacular, German, was adopted and, needless to say, there was great rejoicing: the youth became enthusiastic, the laity could now understand, they could return now to what appeared to be a more evangelical church, they could worship now more meaningfully. The laity had discovered a new relevance in the life of the Church. But the euphoria of juvenile enthusiasm soon gave way to disillusion: the priesthood began to disintegrate, priests and nuns left their monasteries, the convents were emptied, and the religious married. How could this come so soon after the fervor and enthusiasm of the earlier years? The whole phenomenon was but a straw fire because the reformers had attacked the essential elements of Christ's Church, that is, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

With the Sacrifice attacked, the traditional respect for the Eucharist did not remain long immune. The faithful began to receive communion standing, then communion was distributed in the hand, then the reformers began to openly deny the Real Presence, the Supreme Sacrifice, and to deny the priesthood, all that the Church had cherished most dearly.

The Protestant Reformation struck our civilization at its very roots, and it was just a matter of time before the tenets of liberalism were added to those of the religious reformation. Thus in the 17th century, Descartes brought forward the notion of truth being relative, subjective, within ourselves. That is, truth comes from our consciences, and not from outside of ourselves. Descartes refused the notion of truth which comes from God and from Christ. And in the 18th century, Jean Jacques Rousseau carried Descartes a step further, directing his attack at the moral law: Man is good. His conscience is good. Therefore, it is his conscience which should guide him, and not the law.

These three-Luther, who attacked Church dogma and the Faith; Descartes, who attacked the concept of objective truth; and Rousseau, who attacked the moral law-were the precursors of the modern society in which we live today. Today, as we all recognize, faith, truth and the law are all relative and subject to the conscience of the individual. That, ladies and gentlemen, is what Liberalism is all about. Man has become free, liberated, adult, guided now exclusively by his own conscience and by his own will.

What in reality has all this liberation meant for society, for our civilization? It has brought about the destruction of the human person whose very being comes from God and from Our Lord Jesus Christ, whose entire spiritual life comes from Christ, from His law of love, from the gift of His grace which transforms and moves him to adhere to His law. If there is no absolute truth, "truth" is something which we create for ourselves, there is no more God, no need for God, because we are sufficient unto ourselves. We become in effect our own gods and accordingly refuse a God Who transcends ourselves. It is not long before human nature destroys itself.

In the wake of Rousseau came the subjectivist philosophers of the 19th century-Kant, Hegel, and the others-all contributing and advancing the destruction of the Catholic Faith. Little by little these ideas made their way until the principles of Liberalism virtually destroyed the notion of Catholic society. Already by the end of the 18th century it had become imperative in France to be liberated form the restrictions of Catholic law, of Catholic kings, of Catholic society, in a word, of God. That is why in France, bankrupt of God, the goddess Reason was formally consecrated by the State.

The Church of course resisted these tendencies. For a century and a half-from about 1800 to about 1960-the Popes spoke out, issued encyclicals, used every conceivable means to prevent the destruction of the social and moral order by these tendencies. But these ideas, which had their origins in the Protestant Reformation and the advent of Liberalism, made their way little by little, and society became contaminated, and the dikes which hitherto had kept men in an ordered state, burst. Finally, as the Jews before Pontius Pilate, the States declared, "We have no King but Caesar," and accordingly effected the separation of Church and State. They drove Jesus Christ from the courts, from the army, from the university, from the schools. The crucifixes were withdrawn from public buildings; the clergy were relegated to their vestries; society was laicized.

Society had thus become free, free of God. There soon followed freedom of thought, freedom of the press, freedom of conscience. And now, a century and a half later, we find ourselves enslaved by pornography, enslaved by television and the other media of social communications which have thoroughly infused into our society the kind of freedom which destroys morality, the family, and society itself.

For her part, until about 1960, the Church resolutely resisted Liberalism in all these forms. She continued to teach obedience and submission to Jesus Christ, to His law, to His sacrifice, to His sacraments, and to His grace. For it is there that we find truth, true freedom, freedom from the slavery sin. Once free of sin, we become enslaved rather to saintliness.

We see to what brutal depths our society has been reduced. The catechisms are perfect examples of the process I have tried at some length to describe, that catechisms are devoted to destruction. Catechism by its nature suggests a breaking with sin, but modern catechisms are directed towards breaking down tradition and social taboos, breaking the family, destroying the restraints which have held our civilization together. These are the things your children are taught in catechism today. Do the Gospels teach us to destroy? On the contrary, the Gospels teach us to forge bonds of charity, of love: love God, love your parents, love your neighbor. These are strong bonds, mandatory bonds. We are not free to love or not to love. We must love God and our parents and society to the extent, of course, that society is in accord with God's law.

To teach children the concept to destroy is criminal because such a notion will accompany them throughout their life, through their youth, and later, by a dialectic which will gnaw at them, oppose them to others, and consume them with the imperative to be "free" in order to grow, in order to be "themselves." This is fraught with extremely serious consequences and we wonder now how we could even imagine such a system of catechism. The new catechetics are simply a natural long-term consequence of Liberalism.

And though our popes opposed Liberalism and recognized it for what it is, today nevertheless one can safely affirm that Liberalism has overtaken the Catholic Church. It has permeated Catholic morals, culture, society, universities and schools. No area remains immune. Not even our families have been spared the poison of Liberalism. Our seminaries have been contaminated by ideas proposed by such men as Teilhard de Chardin, whereby truth is relative, evolving, personal. There is no longer an immutable truth, no fixed dogma. And this, tragically, is what has come out of Vatican II. Gaudium et Spes best illustrates this. At least two pages are devoted to the idea of change, to the evolution of truth. Change is really what "updating" is all about. Anyone who is a party to "updating" faces that as a premise. Updaters are convinced that as a result of our new-found mastery of nature, we must accept change in philosophy, in modes of expression and action, in the manner in which we conceive our religion, in the realization that the way ideas were understood in the past are no longer applicable today.²

These are the factors which leave Catholics today without incentive for the religious life. People no longer know what the religious state of life is. Recently the Archbishop of Cincinnati, Ohio, reporting to the Roman Synod on the crisis of vocations to the priesthood, solemnly declared that the lack of vocations in the Church today stems from the fact that the priest has lost his sense of identity. What do these incredible words mean? Simply that the priest does not know what he is. Since when does the priest not know who or what he is? After 2,000 years of having priests in the Catholic Church we suddenly no longer know what constitutes a priest. Why have we come to this? Because we have destroyed altars by changing them into "tables," stripped them of the altar stones which from the fourth century have harbored relics of the martyrs. A sacrifice is traditionally offered upon a stone, a stone altar, but today there is no sacrifice, no stone, no relics. The Mass has become a meal. Relics signify that the martyrs had offered themselves as a sacrifice in union with Our Lord. You can understand just how grave it is to abolish these magnificent symbolisms, and to what extent all that is most sacred in the Holy Catholic religion is being tampered with. And all of this tampering penetrated the Church at the Second Vatican Council.

I am frequently criticized because I attack the Council. It is true that I am at variance with the Council because I realize that the Liberal spirit is destroying the Church, the priesthood, the Sacraments, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the catechism, Catholic universities, and Catholic schools. And you yourselves are as firmly convinced as I am because you have the example constantly before your eyes. Parents have come to prefer to send their children to non-Catholic schools, even to Protestant schools, because they are less subject there to perversion than in their own Catholic schools.

Is this not an incomprehensible scandal when we reflect on what Canada was 20 years ago? I came to Sherbrooke 20 years ago at the proud invitation of Bishop Cabana visit his new seminary, finished in 1955, full of seminarians. This remained so until 1965. Today the seminary has been sold and there remains nothing of this work. What is happening in the Church the world over, when seminaries like the one in Sherbrooke, not 20 years old, are disposed of in this way?

Recently, I spoke with an Italian bishop who had just come back from a trip during which he had hoped to come in contact with priests anxious to maintain traditions of the Church, to establish a common bond, to perhaps create an association of traditional priests in Italy. He had returned overwhelmed. Having visited nearly every diocese in Italy, he realized that seminaries were being sold everywhere, and the young priests were unabashed Marxists. Though Italy has an average of three times more priests than France, the seminaries are empty; Turino with 300 places is empty; Milan with 300 places has 80 seminarians from several neighboring dioceses. The Bishop of Casserta confided to me that his seminarians come back to him modernists and refuse to obey him. What kind of diocese is he going to have in a few years in the light of the state of the priesthood and the seminaries today?

In France there are approximately 100 new candidates who enter all the seminaries each year, for 100 dioceses. The only notable seminary left is at Issy-les-Louinaux, near Paris, with 80 seminarians for 25 dioceses and 4 or 5 religious communities. And of these, how many will finish? And how many more are living in the hope that between now and their ordination, Rome will have authorized a married clergy?

This situation, which took root at the Council, is vitally serious. The enthusiasm for liberation was evident throughout the Council. It expressed itself in the equivocal wording of the various schemes, through the idea of change for the sake of change, through the idea of the primacy of the individual conscience as opposed to established law, through the notion of freedom for all religions. This the Church has always regarded as contrary to her rights because she alone is Truth. And if a Catholic state places no obstacle to the spreading of heresy within its jurisdiction, then the state becomes a Protestant state in effect, with all its attendant errors, on marriage, for example, which leads to tolerance for divorce, contraception, and abortion, all of which vastly undermines Catholic society. We recognize that it is precisely this which has set the Church upon a course of full-scale self-destruction, which has become more and more obvious.

These are the reasons why we are so attached to Tradition. This is why, in the face of the deluge, this universal destruction of the Holy Catholic Church, we affirm the will to preserve the Catholic Mass, the Catholic Sacraments, the Catholic catechism, our Catholic universities and our Catholic schools. We refuse to maintain liberal schools in which everything and anything goes. We insist upon Catholic schools in order that our children be raised as Catholics. We insist upon Catholic universities in order that our children not be perverted. We no longer dare send a young man or a young lady to a Catholic university. We prefer to send them to a state university.

Seminarians no longer know where to go. In seminaries today, seminarians come and go as they please, at any time of day and night, assist at daily Mass or stay away, as they please.

We are thus in the state of decomposition and we cannot accept this situation. This is why our resistance gives the impression that we are attempting to stand in the way of all this change. I have been requested to close my seminary at Ecône. Why do I refuse to obey this order? Because I most emphatically do not wish my seminarians to become Protestants, because I do not wish my seminarians to become Modernists, because I do not wish my seminarians to lose their faith and moral perspective. I am quite certain if they were released and sent to other seminaries they would lose their faith and their moral perspective. Accordingly, it appears to me that I have no choice but to resist this order.

I am asked how it is that I can refuse orders which come from Rome. Indeed, these orders do come from Rome, but which Rome? I believe in Eternal Rome, the Rome of the Sovereign Pontiffs, the Rome which dispenses the very life of the Church, the Rome which transmits the true Tradition of the Church. I am considered disobedient, but I am moved to ask why have those who issue orders which in themselves are blameworthy, been given their authority. The Pope, the cardinals, the bishops, the priests have been given their authority for the purpose of transmitting life, the spiritual life, the supernatural life, eternal life, just as parents and society as a whole have been given their authority to transmit and protect life. The word "authority" itself is from the Latin "auctorita? and "auctof which have meanings referring to "author," as in author of life. We have authority insofar as we transmit and sustain life. We are not authorized to transmit death. Society is not permitted to pass laws which authorize abortion, because abortion is death. In like manner, the pope, the cardinals, the bishops, and priests exist as such to transmit and sustain spiritual life. Unfortunately, it is apparent that many of them today no longer transmit or sustain life, but rather authorize spiritual abortion.

These are the reasons why, in the face of an order to close my seminary, I refuse to obey. I believe that we have a desperate need for the type of Catholic priest who transmits the life of the soul. I know you do not want priests who may administer Sacraments invalidly. From time to time I am asked to administer Confirmation, which, of course, is irritating to local bishops who remind me that I have no right to confirm in their dioceses. Naturally, I recognize this, but I remind them in turn that they have no right to administer Sacraments of doubtful validity to children whose parents want them to receive the sacramental grace. These parents have the right to be certain that their children are receiving the grace of Confirmation. This, after all, is a grave responsibility for parents. It is grace which keeps the soul alive and, to this end, I much prefer to see parents confident that their children have received the sacramental grace of Confirmation even when, by administering the Sacrament in someone else's diocese, I am acting illicitly. I may at least rest easy in the knowledge that the children confirmed in the manner prescribed by the Church for centuries truly carry the sacramental grace within them, that the Sacrament is truly valid.³

All of this, therefore, is of utmost importance, and it is also the reason why we must maintain Catholic Tradition, and fear neither difficulties nor obstructions. We are living in a time of veritable agony. We must be careful, of course, not to offer violent opposition to our bishops and to our priests who refuse to understand the grave dangers under which the Church labors today. But in following the Church of all time, we must also pray for our pastors. We are not inventing anything new. I have not innovated at my seminary at Ecône.

Those who condemn me are condemning their own formation, which is absurd. In the face of these absurdities, I can only close my ears and my eyes, and continue to receive seminarians. In September (1975) I welcomed 25 new candidates at Ecône, 5 at our new German-language seminary near Lake Constance in German Switzerland, and 12 at our new house at Armada, Michigan. Vocations are surely not wanting and I am quite certain that were we encouraged instead of harassed and struck down, I would have not three seminaries, but seminaries in every part of the world. Make no mistake: there are sufficient good, young, willing men, good and holy vocations in every country.

We are bound, therefore, to pray that we recover one day an understanding of the way of the priesthood because Catholic society cannot live without its priests. The Church without the priesthood is no longer the Church. It is for this reason essentially that I ask your fervent prayers for young priests. Pray also to the Blessed Virgin Mary, for she is the Mother of priests and the Mother of the priesthood. Pray for the graces for holy vocations, and for assistance with respect to Rome, that one day Rome itself may be enlightened.

Rome for me has become a great mystery. What is happening in Rome? It is surely Rome that constitutes the most serious problem. To say such a thing is neither calumny nor detraction, for if the crisis in the Church has spread to every country in the world, it is only sensible to seek a common cause at its Seat. There is something distinctly abnormal and sinister about Rome today. The workings of grace are being obstructed in Rome. There are men in Rome who are under the ascendancy of Satan. How else could the Church be strangled, as it were, and troubled to such an extent? Though we may not readily understand the problem, one can feel it, sense the atmosphere of today's Rome. I am still frequently in Rome, and I have occasion to chat from time to time to priest-employees of the different Sacred Congregations, the men who carry out the day-to-day affairs of the Curia. These men confide to me in private that Rome has become stifling, that a veritable terror reigns in the bureaus and the corridors of the Vatican, with always somebody listening, spying, ready to report, to criticize. Even the cardinals are not immune to the terror, to the veritable diabolical influence which permeates every facet of Vatican life.

What has caused such a deterioration? Who are these sinister people? Are they hidden personalities, or are they clerics in important positions? Nobody seems to know, but what is absolutely certain is that this spirit permeates not only the Seat of the Catholic Church, but every one of us no matter how physically distant we are from Rome.

The present state of Rome is just one more reason why we must not hesitate or fear to regroup. In closing I would wish to emphasize especially how important it is to remain united, and to avoid dissension at all costs. We are already so few who wish to hold onto Tradition, who understand, who have received the graces. It is God's grace that has allowed us to keep our holy traditions, the very traditions which have produced the saints. It is vital, therefore, that we proceed as of one mind, that we labor together in order to better insure a strong defense.

You most assuredly have it within your power, through grace, to build up something solid, which will last, which will attract others, something which will allow you to form your children. You will, find it easier to provide catechists to help you in your task. You will find it easier to organize your own schools, administered by laymen who are fully Catholic, teaching the true catechism, celebrating the traditional liturgy, forming your children as strong and perfect Catholics. It is this sort of arrangement we must attain in order to protect our Holy Religion and our souls, for, ultimately, to save our souls is all that essentially matters.

Given November 18, 1975, in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Translated from the French by Mr. Bernard Pothier. It was first published in the Canadian Layman, and is now appearing in Arrivederci, Padre Pio by Anne McGinn Cillis, pp.1163-71. Reprinted with Mrs. Cillis's permission. This conference has never appeared in The Angelus.

 

Raphael Cardinal Merry del Val

Fr. Jacques-Yves Pertin

Fr. Christian Thouvenot

The light that shone in the Church during 11 years of pontificate was extinguished on August 20, 1914. Pope Pius X fell sick on the Feast of the Assumption of Our Lady (Aug. 15) and received extreme unction and Holy Viaticum before dying. He was buried August 23, and his tomb immediately became the object of a popular devotion.