| Editor : Abbé Georges de Nantes | N° 75 – December 2008 |
|
Our Lady of Fatima Camp 2007
CRUSADE AGAINST THE NEW CATECHISMS
The “Dutch Catechism, Introduction to the Catholic Faith” was published shortly after the Second Vatican Council. It received the imprimatur of Cardinal Alfrink, the Primate of the Church of Holland on 1 March 1966. Also, the Conference of Bishops of France, gathered at Lourdes, adopted the “Fonds commun obligatoire” in October 1966 by a vote of a hundred and four against one.
These are two poisoned fruits of Vatican II. Even though they had “ripened” during the 1950s, during which the Modernist sect multiplied books and journals in an attempt to impose the so-called “progressive” catechism, it was the Council, the « catechism of the new times » as Paul VI used to say, that allowed them to come into being in the Church. The Reform of the Church was their guarantee as well as their main reference point.
A COUNTER-REFORMATION COMBAT
The Abbé de Nantes was the only one in France to take the matter seriously from the outset. For it was a question of the Faith, of the souls of the children of France, as he wrote in November 1966 on the occasion of the fourth centenary of the Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent. What is a catechism?
« An insuperable obstacle for heresy, a remedy for schism and a most effective weapon of combat against religious indifference and apostasy, the catechism is the solid basis of the faith of the humble, and I add, for having taught it much with ever renewed interest that was easy for me to communicate to my parishioners and their children, it is the incomparable means for old and young alike, from whatever social class, from whatever milieu, race, nation they may be, to have access to the most exact and the loftiest practice of religion. » (Letter to My Friends n° 237, p. 12)
At the same moment, a young bishop of Italy, Albino Luciani, a disciple of St. Pius X, also had a liking for this « incomparable means » of popular education. From his “Catechism Tidbits, Catechesi in bricciole”, which were published in 1949, he would make good bread when he became Bishop of Vittorio Veneto, then Patriarch of Venice, before ascending to the pontifical throne. He filled the faithful with enthusiasm by the very simple, direct form of his speeches that were full of imagery and went straight to the essential. « How well he preaches! We understand everything », a woman from the working class said. This was the catechetical renewal that should have been advocated, in accord with pure Catholic tradition.
But this was not the “project” of our bishops after the Council. At the end of October 1966, the jounalist Robert Serrou wrote in Paris-Match: « At the little Council of Lourdes (sic!), the whole French episcopate set the Church on course for the twenty-first century… The episcopate condemned dad’s catechism to death. The new one will be totally different. It will even be revolutionary. What did the children used to learn? What had to be believed or done in order to go to Heaven? Truths to be believed, commandments to be practiced, Sacraments to be received: these were the three keys to paradise. The Council changed everything. »
Everything was changed? The Abbé de Nantes immediately understood the plot that was being hatched: the bishops want to impose on us the « catechism of their new religion », « the religion that I call Masdu. To refuse this catechism is to refuse the reform of the Church; this catechism is its entire programme. » (CRC n° 6, p. 2) The new catechism would thus be the first battlefield of the Counter-Reformation.
A NATIONAL CRUSADE FOR THE DEFENCE
OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CATECHISM
At the same time, a group of Dutch traditionalists, “Confrontatie”, had asked the Pope to intervene. The « unweildly, but very honest and competent Roman machine » then set into motion. Paul VI appointed a commission of Roman theologians responsible for approaching the Dutch episcopate, which, for its part, delegated theologians to Gazzada, among whom was the Dominican Schillebeeckx.
Meetings, doctrinal reports and press releases followed one another. In April 1967, fourteen major points and forty-five questionable passages of the Dutch Catechism were reported by the Roman delegation. On 24 December, they reached twenty major points! One might as well say twenty “heresies”, a word that has been banished from the Church’s vocabulary since the Council. Rome showed much courtesy and diplomacy, while the Dutch were disdainful, refusing any modification of their text. From Maison Saint-Joseph our Father followed the devastating effects of « the post-conciliar storm, swelled by the conciliar wind », which manifested itself in the way he himself had announced.
The French were not long to follow suit: « The corpus delicti is finally published », our Father wrote in March 1968. He was going to examine the Fonds obligatoire;it cost a hundred hours of intense work, from which he drew six issues of the CCR, from April to November 1968. In the meanwhile, his trial at the Holy Office was taking place.
On 30 June 1968, for the closing of the Year of the Faith, Paul VI published his “Creed of the People of God” to answer all the heresies of the Dutch Catechism point by point. « The first duty of the Magisterium is to define the Faith. This has been done. The other duty, which is similar to the first, is to impose the truth and banish error; it must come », the Abbé de Nantes hoped (CRC n° 10, July 1968). But the anathemas never came. We now know that the greater part of Paul VI’s Profession of Faith had been written by his friend, Jacques Maritain, who wrote:
« If the Pope made it look as though he were prescribing or imposing his Profession of Faith in the name of his Magisterium, either he must say the whole truth and would raise a storm, or else he will need to use tact, and avoid the points that are the most dangerously threatened, which would be worst of all. » (30 Days, April 2008, p. 55) It is not surprising that Paul VI’s Creed remained without results and without real impact in the life of the Church. Subversion from the grass roots persisted. The “new catechisms” continued their course, mortally poisoning the souls of the faithful.
After having studied the French Fonds obligatoire, the Abbé de Nantes attacked the Dutch Catechism. He published a systematic commentary on it beginning in May 1969 (CRC nos 20-35). « As for me, he recounted, one fine morning I opened the Dutch Catechism. Very soon I was enthralled. Of course, I stumbled against the same points as the Roman theologians – I only noticed this later on – but I was captivated by this modern human perspective, this intelligence, both speculative and practical, which leaps out at one on every page, both in its theological and spiritual content as well as in its skilfully adapted pastoral form. I almost had to make an effort to tear myself away from the fascination of pages 334 onwards. It is there that one comes across the ruin of the essential Christian Mystery, that of our Redemption. I pursued my reading with a growing horror for this magnificent intellectual instrument for the perversion of souls, so dangerous that I myself had been enthralled by it. It was only on reading it for the third time from the first to the last page that I discovered in it, admirably disguised under the purely evangelical and modern Christian religion, what is its total, diabolical inversion, Masdu. I then understood why this “catechism” would never be snatched from the hands of priest or faithful by any of those who were involved even remotely in the reform of the Church that the Second Vatican Council had decreed. This was the most powerful modern anti-Christian document; our French catechisms are only wretched copies of it. All of this will lead to the great apostasy that the Scriptures predict », was his anguished conclusion (CRC n° 20, p. 4).
This is why he launched a “National Crusade for the Roman Catholic Catechism”, together with Father Barbara, Pierre Lemaire, a country parish priest, and a lady catechist. The public opening of hostilities took place in the grand hall of the Mutualité on 28 February 1969. It was a memorable evening: three thousand five hundred attentive, hearty Catholics were mobilised to put obstacles in the way of the “New Catechisms”. Throngs were also present in Lyon, Grenoble, Marseille, Tours, Nantes, Lille, Reims, Nancy… where packed houses proved the distress that Christian families felt. We will relate in the conclusion how this magnificent movement was broken.
We must now open these famous “New Catechisms”, comparing them with the twelve issues of the CRC that were devoted to them.
A TOTAL HERESY
Let us first deal with the accusation made against the old catechism, which was considered too intellectual, didactic, abstract, and, thus, incomprehensible to children today. “Ideas”, it would seem, no longer appeal to them. What they need are concrete examples, “living witness”. Here is our Father’s answer:
« The least of philosophers knows full well that there are no ideas that are not abstract. The lone difference lies in their veracity or falsehood. Every true idea is bursting with vitality, thrilling with intelligible vigour and, if one wishes, concrete. False ideas answer nothing and remain vain, empty, and sterile. The old catechism was sovereignly concrete, existential, and vital because it taught us the truth about God. Because it faithfully repeated the divine Words, it doubly connected us to our Creator and Saviour by revealing us both His transcendent Nature and His will concerning us. » (CRC n° 9, p. 3)
An a priori inherited from the Council had governed the writing of these catechisms: we must, their authors said, reformulate the faith, revise Christian life, and present them in a way for them to be acceptable to modern man, to children of today. This is exactly what John XXIII had declared in his Opening Address at the Council on 11 October 1962: « It is necessary for this certain and unchangeable doctrine, which must be respected faithfully, to be studied and expounded in a way that meets the requirements of our time. »
But in the name of what authority and in accordance with what references could the articles of the Faith be translated « in another manner »? Out of the thirty-eight quotations of the Fonds obligatoire, – with the exception of the “source texts” that form a separate chapter – only six are taken from Holy Scripture! One is taken from pontifical teaching, John XXIII’s words, which we have just quoted. All the rest refer to the Acts of Vatican II: eleven to the Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, and twelve to the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes. « As regards “biblical catechism”, here we have a conciliar catechism that teaches the religion of Vatican II, even if it means justifying it with a deceitful biblical apparatus. »
In it we find entire pages of the Council’s illuminism: it is no longer a question, as in the past, of teaching a ready-made Truth that comes from on high – the word catechism means: “I speak from on high” – but of « educating » them, that is to have them discover by themselves, within themselves, the pervading Christian realities. This is taken from Dei Verbum: experiencing the “divine”, which everyone is called to do under the impulse of the “Spirit”, is substituted for faith in the Church of Jesus Christ, which teaches us authoritatively what she received from God. A pedagogy of “signs” will be employed, those famous “signs of the times” with which the Council was intoxicated. Thus everything is sign and revelation: the news in the morning paper and the words of God that are read when opening one’s Bible.
This Protestant and Modernist illuminism no longer bears any resemblance to the Catholic Faith at all. « The Our Father, the Creed, the Commandments and the Rites must be learned; they cannot be invented. Yet, thanks to the light of faith that is in them since Baptism, our children come straight to this worshipful prayer, this mysterious wisdom, this holy life that the Church teaches.
« The new religion broke this harmony. On the one hand, it claimed to make everyone “discover” by means of an initiatory sort of “life experience” the “Word and active Presence of God in the world”; on the other hand, it wants to lead this individual discovery in a “compulsory” way towards the novelty of a dogma in which the Gospel and the World would be reconciled in the selfsame “Christian dynamism”. The contradiction between subjective illumination and compulsory catechetics was already a mark of Protestantism. » (CRC n° 8, p. 3)
A NEW CREED
MODERNISM: AN IMMANENT GOD.
After distorting, falsifying the formal object of the Faith, the same now happens to its contents. The Fonds obligatoire is divided into six pedagogical “lines”: what children must be made aware of. First line: « God leads us together towards Him »; second line: « God reveals to us His mystery and the mystery of man. » Not for one instant do the authors think of proving God’s existence. It is not worthwhile: God speaks and acts « in the Church and in the world », here, there, before the children’s eyes. Straightaway they are seized by a God who has made everything out of love. « We will thus avoid representing God in a way that would have Him imagined as separated from man and the world. We will avoid an abstract presentation of God. »
When the children no longer have a « life experience » of this God-Love, they will lose the Faith.
The Dutch do not differ from the French in what they say. The first part of their catechism is entitled: Existence, a Mystery. « It is the principle of the theological research of these last ten years in Holland, the authors insist; more than ever it is based on the experiences of human life. » Man asks his questions to God, and God is supposed to answer him, from within. « Even if it means mutilating and distorting history, our Father writes, the Dutch God is totally immanent. His word, His law are nothing but the outpouring of the Self. »
Fr. Renckens, a Jesuit from Amsterdam who was the direct inspirer of the Dutch Catechism, did not hesitate, for his part, to write: « Basically, Yahweh is nowhere. The God of the Hebrews is a God of revolution… He cannot be fit into any religious system. He is nothing other than the voice of the reality that is given to us. »
« Thereupon, our Father writes, we should have closed this catechism. If God is not free in relation to His work and if He is prisoner of His creature, He is not the perfect and blessed Being, the foundation of all natural and supernatural truth; He is not the Sovereign Master nor the Just Judge whom man must adore, venerate and fear even before daring to give Him filial love; He is not the Almighty Father, but a doddering old man idolatrous of his spoilt child… He is a religious symbol of the love that man invincibly has for himself. » (CRC n° 8, p. 5)
God’s plan, His “project”, we are told, is to « establish a definitive communion between Himself and all men united ». « Here we are swept, our Father wrote, persons and communities, onto the conveyor belt of this Plan of love towards unifying everyone, all together with God. » Of course, « God is love » (1 Jn 4:8) and He « wills everyone to be saved » (1 Tm 2:4). This love and this will of salvation unfold throughout history with a view to consummating the Covenant. « All our catechisms, our Father wrote, the old and the new, present themselves in this historical perspective. God and man are engaged in a dialogue, a search for one another that is not without tragedy. God loved us first, and it was quite simple in the beginning. But man’s bad will came to complicate and obscure this initial light. »
This is the point at which the traditional and the new catechism separate. « We do not find the same history in it, our Father observes, there is not the same tragedy, it is not the same Revelation. God’s Heart is not the same in the old and the new. » The innovators criminally disposed of what it called « the work of the first love »: Creation, in its holiness and justice, of the first man and the first woman, soon followed by their criminal revolt, state of disgrace, and resulting decay. For them, there is no « mystery of the origins », no Garden of Eden, no Adam’s fall, no chastisement. For the Dutch Catechism, Adam is Man, every man, whom God loves in a timeless manner, as he is: pure or impure, faithful or unfaithful. For his « salvation », his joy, his success, and his happiness, God will do all that is necessary, without fail.
What a sudden void, our Father points out, and what ruins in the souls of children, if they no longer have the truth of the origin of Sacred History, such as God willed us to know it in order to give them the key to their existence on earth and to the tragedy of the human condition!
In its stead, the Dutch Catechism develops at length something that it calls « the way that leads to Christ », i.e., « the religious experience » of peoples, whoever they may be. Each people, each person has its own way, which, above all, we must not judge! Each religion is presented in a favourable, positive light, in keeping with Nostra ætate. It is concluded that humanity is led by « the Spirit » in a mysterious way. Of course, « Israel’s way » is richer, but the Revelation that is made to the Jewish people is stripped of its objective basis, in order to be reduced also to an interior experience. The Hebrew people experienced in its history tremendous moments: liberation from Egypt, the passage of the Red Sea, the entry into the Promised Land… from which it composed a grandiose and rich account of all sorts of allegories… myths.
Once again: if doubt arises about this “subjective experience”, nothing else will stand firm, and faith will disappear. Our authors care little about the danger, and call us to live fully our human condition, following Christ’s example.
GNOSTICISM : JESUS, MAN’S REVEALER.
« Jesus’ message will truly be perceived as a Good News if it meets the children’s profound expectations and of their milieu (sic!) in order to bring them out, enlighten them, and lead them to go beyond themselves. » (Fonds obligatoire) This “going beyond themselves” is an appeal to human brotherhood by means of divine filiation, of course, but without the conditions for its realisation: faith and Baptism, being specified. To enter into God’s family, we must believe in Jesus, Son of God and the Virgin Mary, and be baptised. But that was in the past. « Mary, the Mother of Jesus » only has an insignificant role here in the history of salvation. The Dutch Catechism goes so far as to exclude from its prayers the Ave Maria: « Satan’s signature », our Father writes.
Here is the aim of the Incarnation, which directly takes its inspiration from Gaudium et Spes 22, 2: « Because the Son of God was true man, each human person became a being of infinite value. Thus consciousness of the dignity and rights of man developed… These considerations make us imagine the extent to which the mystery of God made man is closely related to the mystery of man who becomes man (sic!). »
That is the Kingdom: « What appeared in the hills of Galilee in simplicity and love, will end in a unique and vast love that will unite all that lives. To welcome the Kingdom means: to want to participate in this love. To believe in the Kingdom means: to believe in this immortal unity of men in the joy of the Father. » Since Jesus was dedicated to this human advancement, He took « headship of all humanity ». Unfortunately, along His way He encountered an obstacle: the sin and wickedness of men, who went so far as to put Him to death on a cross. So, Christ submitted in order to show how far His love went. From this angle, the Cross is no more than a quickly forgotten setback because Christ perfectly accepted it…
Here, our Father could no longer contain his indignation: the love that burns the Heart of Jesus is something quite different from this third-rate philanthropy! To the appalling tragedy of sin corresponded the magnificent tragedy of the Cross, which redeemed this sin. « If Christ died, if He rent Himself in order to open Heaven for us, it must be said that concurrently He forever rent humanity; that He took with Him the entire sound part of humanity (I do not mean those who are without sin, but those who recognise that they are sinners and who adhere to Him through the water of Baptism and through the Blood of the Eucharistic Sacrifice); that He formed a new humanity because He is the new Adam. This new humanity is the Church, and the Church is not the world. I regret to say to Fr. Congar that the Church is not “the world’s soul”. The Church is a new human race that Christ drew from His own Heart and that He will never give back to the Devil. » (CRC n° 17, p. 5)
From this comes the main accusation: the new catechisms have emptied the Catholic dogma of Redemption of its substance; they have « emptied the Cross of Christ of all its meaning », as St. Paul said. The only thing that interests them now is the Resurrection… Risen from the dead, Jesus goes throughout the universe to instil in it His power for life, for transfiguring man, for building a « new world » that is free, equal, and fraternal. Seek this new world, and Heaven will be added unto you, if you value that.
Our Father touches a raw nerve when he asks: « In fact, where are the controversies recalled? Why are Christ’s words that teach sacrifice, abnegation, the daily cross, contempt for the world, fear of the Devil, systematically omitted? The Gospel of St. John and its tragedy is not only shortened, it is falsified. The Synoptics are purged of the abruptness of the Gospel maxims that Christian piety cherishes most. It is no longer Christ or the life of Christ, when all the shades and even the vigorous stroke that give their contour to the mysteries of light have been effaced! Here we have the key to the riddle. Under the most fervent theological language of Christianity, we discover new anti-Christian contents. »
Then in a pithy turn of phrase, he sets out the two images of Christ and Antichrist, the Gospel and its falsification:
« If the Christ of Christianity must give stark proof, against prideful reason and all carnal passion, that He is Saviour and Lord, Son of God, God Himself, the Christ of the Dutch Catechism has no proof to give, no contestation to support, no battle to wage: He is so much a man, His message is so flattering to the pride and sensuality of man that to consider Him their God, they will only divinise themselves with their pride, independence and loves, “all kinds of love…” » (CRC n° 21, p. 6)
UNANIMISM: THE CHURCH-MASDU.
For the new catechisms, the Church is no longer the blessed City of God that must one day encompass all humanity, but this humanity itself, with all its various religions that work towards the same aim.
The Fonds obligatoire begins by recalling that « several realities are constantly linked in the glory of the Mystery of Easter, namely: the Risen Jesus, the Church, and the World. While avoiding all opposition among them, one will show, on the contrary, their constant interaction. » A constant interaction between Christ and the Church, yes, but between Christ and the World, between the Church and the World, absolutely not. It is Jesus Himself, His Apostles, and the entire tradition of the Church that have said so!
The Spirit, the Fonds obligatoire continues, « animates, from within, the quest for unity of the Christian community and humanity… He unceasingly opens the Church to the world. The Spirit calls everyone to commit himself to the service of others and thus to fit even more into the Christian community and the great family of men. » Between the municipal employee who helps children cross the road at the village centre, and the sacristan who prepares the altar for Mass, there is no difference. They are both animated by the same spirit of « service of others ».
Thus, the Church is this borderless people of God because it is assembled out of love, without any structure other than “service”, in other words, the charismatic union of men of good will led by the “Spirit” that Lumen Gentium already described. Its main mission is to animate the profane world, thanks to a dedicated and dynamic laity. Our Father summarises: « The Church is like a travel agency. The laity are the flying personnel. The clerics, Pope, bishops, priests, religious, are its administrative personnel, “the services”. »
The Dutch Catechism, on the other hand, navigates in complete Modernism. According to it, the Church is not founded on the historical miracle of the Resurrection and Christ’s divine teachings, but on « the faith of the Apostles », its diffusion, and its « revivals » throughout the centuries, the thirteenth, sixteenth, and twentieth centuries:
« The Church must constantly rethink the truth and give it a new form at each age in which she lives… to preserve faithfully the truth that was handed down, and rethink it untiringly. » This must be done together with other Christians, in the ecumenical climate that was imposed by the Council: « We must grow together towards a new Catholic Church (sic!), that is, universal. » This “new Church” is supposed to accompany better the growth of humanity: « It really seems that, despite everything, our whole planet is on the way to a greater opening up and better contact among men… This struggle to be able to pray, to master oneself, for a hearty goodness, for unselfish love, conjugal fidelity, virginity, peace and patience, is this not, in fact, the history of the Church? »
« Oh! No, it is not that, our Father writes. Re-read the Apocalypse, or the Discourse on Universal History! »
Our Father contrasts this charismatic love, which has no contours, no definitions, which is absolutely sterile, to the love that the Church, unique Spouse of Christ and our Mother, arouses in the hearts of her children: « Our beloved life is to be members of the Church, to be nurtured on her faith, to receive the Sacraments, and to lead a life of penance in order to be forever united to her. Ah! May I never be separated from her! That is the love of God that presses us, gathers us, makes us, through the agency of all our missionaries, radiate this truth that consumes us, so that, if it were possible, all human beings be saved. But they will be only if, through our work, our labour, we have united them to Christ in the Church. » (CRC n° 17 suppl., p. 5)
CARELESS WORSHIP, LAWLESS MORALITY
Degrading dogma leads to lax morality. « The innovators’ basic falsehood lies in corrupting these two affirmations that summarise Catholic dogma and morality: God is love and God’s law makes man’s happiness. Modern theorists understand them contrary to their authentic meaning: Love is God! Man’s happiness is God’s law! » (CRC n° 9, p. 3)
Our Father is not exaggerating. Read what is written in the Dutch Catechism: « Love is so divine that it does not suffice to say: God is love, it must also be said: Love is God. In all true love God is present, even if He is not expressly known. Where love exists, the divine life exists. »
The revelation of divine Charity, which was the crowning achievement of the ante-conciliar religion and the first principle of authentic mystical life, gave life to a demanding and powerful morality. Here, the false mysticism of Pure Love make all morality useless and turns human passions into licentiousness. That is nothing but Quietism: « Christian action is snatched from the prayer of petition, meritorious effort, ecclesiastical obedience, and sacramental life in order to be entirely linked to the mysterious outpourings of God in the interior of the soul. The New Catechism is preparing us generations of mystics, little children-gods. »
At that precise moment in 1967, there appeared first in the United States then in Europe the Charismatic Renewal, a Catholic version of Protestant Pentecostalism, which would be the ideal propaganda instrument for this unnatural mysticism.
The theological virtues lost their objective character in order to be the expression of « attitudes »: attitude of faith, it is no longer a question of intellectual certainties based on God’s testimony and authority, but of faith - confidence in the Protestant manner. Attitude of hope: in the expectation of the Lord’s encounter, « certainty that God works effectively to realise His plan ». If He does all the work, there is no need to collaborate by means of prayer, penance, and the reception of the Sacraments! Finally, attitude of charity: love for God and neighbour is no longer a gift from Christ and the Church, no longer does it depend on faith and hope, no longer is it nurtured by the Sacraments, no longer does it urge us to act. It is a pure effect of the presence of the “Spirit” in us, as in every man. It awakens in us friendship, generosity, and solidarity; it covers all weaknesses. It suffices to abandon ourselves passively to Him.
In the chapter on the Commandments, the Fonds obligatoire recommends: « One must avoid presenting the requirements for the Kingdom in an abstract and juridical manner. »
« I am annoyed by this constant perfidy of our postconciliar authors, our Father writes. It immensely disgusts me. I suppose that Cardinal Lefebvre is capable of discovering the pernicious error [President of the French Bishops’ Conference, Cardinal Lefebvre was also an assessor at the former Holy Office.]. Just in case, I will indicate it to him. It is loathsome to point out the danger of proposing the Commandments as “simple means of safeguarding moral order” as though it were the Church’s common practice. All the more is this so because this allusive accusation ends up imposing the opposite, much more serious error, which makes the law a pure effect of God’s love, a simple means for attaining a perfect, happy, fulfilled way of living. If this were “the meaning of the law in the Gospel”, everything would be perfectly simple: it would suffice to follow our instinct for happiness, our amorous inclinations, and this is indeed where they want to lead us. »
« The Catholic truth that is being concealed from us is far from this naturalism. Come on, Eminence! The salvation of souls is at stake… Here it is: God’s Commandments are a trial that is imposed on our reason, our heart, and our instincts. They must be obeyed, and even without seeing, without understanding, by the lone force of faith, hope, and charity, which are not romantic “attitudes”, but supernatural, often heroic, virtues. Later on, sometimes at the end of life, obedience unveils what it is in all its hidden splendour, an admirable work of grace; and the Commandment then appears the very law of happiness, but a happiness that God conceived and chose for us, far from what we could have conceived and chosen for ourselves. Let us not be deceived. The theory that reduces God’s Law to our lone advantage, an advantage perceptible to us, is immoral. » (CRC n° 9, p. 8)
The same act of perfidy is found with the Dutch.
« The commandments of God no longer exist; Sinai has disappeared in the Dutch fog. God is no longer the absolute legislator. They are human aspirations with which it is possible and easy to pick and choose. »
If the Dutch Catechism is prolix enough to describe the « new life » in Christ, it presents it as a continuation of our natural life in the world. It only serves up an “extra course for the soul” that fulfils man’s inner aspirations. This is the total confusion of the human and the divine, humanisation of the divine, divinisation of the human, a heresy that our Father had denounced as early as 1959; today it has passed into the Church’s teaching. There follow some beautiful pages on prayer and the Sacraments, but it lacks what is essential:
« There is no longer any trace of sin, of mercy, of the slow progress that, from purifications to inspirations, leads the soul to ecstasy. There is no cross standing at the crossroads… Here prayer is a lace scallop to embellish the mundane life with the richness of legend. » (CRC n° 32, p. 7)
As regards the Eucharist, the heresy is even more flagrant. The authors explicitly deny that the Mass is a Sacrifice: people gather to give thanks together, feed themselves on the Word of Christ and on a Bread that « signifies » His Presence in our midst.
All the subsequent chapters on morality are affected by this pagan humanism; the chapter on love and marriage reminds our Father of « these white marble monuments about which the Holy Gospels speak; they only conceal stench and decomposition. Thus is modern love, the highly sexual appearance of which is beautiful, but does not resist any of life’s temptations. It would have been necessary, in the exact opposite order, to base everything on spiritual love, supernatural friendship, which we call by the beautiful name of Charity. The rest, which participates in its perfection, has been given in addition. »
There is another chapter on Justice and Peace, in the perspective of service to humanity and the building of the world.
« It is not the novelty of the Gospel Law, despite the verbal similarities that have been multiplied by design; it is the Law of a new Gospel of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, mixed with Christian mysticism thanks to quotations from Pacem in Terris and Gaudium et Spes. » With Dutch comfort on top of that!
As for their “mysticism of work” based on material progress and solidarity in pains: « To say: the Christian knows that every work, every form of suffering, every failure accepted with faith is redemptive, is not the same as saying: the Christian knows through his faith that all work, suffering, or failure is redemptive. The former is Catholic and the latter no longer is. » (CRC n° 34, p. 8)
Of course, the Christian, who is often at fault, will be forced to recognise his powerlessness… That is « sin », our authors murmur, but take heart! The Church is there, bearer of the forgiveness that restores man to grace after his fall, in order to help him continue on his way. Where? This is the second part of the Dutch Catechism. « The road to the end » imprisons us for good in the limits of an earthly horizon: « Never has anyone encountered or given enough love in his life, never enough truth, freedom, beauty, goodness, joy. Our life is always inclined towards… » Towards what? Towards Heaven? Ah no, you are far off track: « towards a new “tomorrow”. » Then it is not worth it! « The precise, impressive characteristics of the Christian Last Ends, our Father writes, are half effaced here so as to be no more than the evanescent symbol of all the chimeras after which humanity chases. »
The authors of the new catechisms answered all the critiques that were made to them by priding themselves on having returned to the Bible, as the Council had advocated. It is a new imposture, the Abbé de Nantes writes, and he proves that it is.
THE SCRIPTURES FALSIFIED
« They chose from the Bible whatever is in line with the new faith; they can then set Scripture against Tradition, and the Holy Spirit against the Magisterium. But heresy – “heresy” exactly means “choosing” – reveals itself in this manner of fiddling with the Word of God (…). They mutilate, prune, and graft the biblical texts. There is nothing further to be said: they are “pedagogical” options, whose inspiration is guaranteed by the infallible French episcopate that supports it entirely. » (CRC n° 12, p. 3)
So it is that the “Fraud ‘obligatoire’” entitles its second chapter “Collection of Source Texts”. These seventy-two excerpts from Holy Scripture form a sort of “Digest”. The scathing, conclusive criticism that the Abbé de Nantes makes (CRC nos 12-14), is accompanied in counterpoint by the most fortunate orthodromic, mystical presentation of biblical Revelation, from Genesis to the Apocalypse. It shows us that our Father knows the sacred text perfectly, since he received it as a child of the Church, studied it as a scholar, and savoured it as a mystic.
From the first eleven chapters of Genesis, only the account of the creation of man and woman was selected: « Man resembles God at all time; he is great, very great, and his mission is to dominate all things. There is no supernatural order, no fall, no punishment. The curses and humiliations of chapter 3 are no longer there to balance and situate man’s true grandeur, which is supernatural. Man is great, very great. Amen. »
The second “source text” is the choice of Abraham, chapter 12:1-5. But verse 3 is missing: « I will bless those who bless you; I will curse those who curse you. » Our Father comments:
« This is how all the texts that express curses, reprobation, God’s Wrath against individuals or persons, in short three-quarters of the Old Testament, are treated. It is traumatising! From the time of Abraham, God is already only a real softie of a dad who demands nothing, puts up with everything, and never gets angry. »
« Another omission to which we will have to accustom ourselves: never will our Digest mention the sacrifices, which nevertheless abound and are the essential rites of the Old Testament before the New Testament existed, sacrifice of the Covenant, sacrifice of Isaac, of the Paschal Lamb, of Sinai, of the consecration of the Temple, etc. It is forbidden to children: the idea of sacrifice is so alien to the modern mentality that they would be unable to understand! »
Thus it is that the Historical Books of the Bible are corrected, mutilated, trivialised. The Prophetic Books do not have a better fate: they rework Chapter 9 of Isaiah on the coming of the royal Child who will save His people and obtain peace for the world. He seems to be undemonstratively indifferent and placidly atheist, and the prophecy falls flat.
The gem of the Poem of the Suffering Servant has been removed: the annunciation of the Redemption that He will bring about « if He offers Himself as a sacrifice for sin ». The most astonishing, the greatest prophecy of the Old Testament is emptied of its substance! Likewise, when the « consolation » that the Prophets promised is taken out of the tragic context of the chastisements that unfaithful Israel suffered, it is no more than sentimentality:
« The driving force of Sacred History, what rushed the Old Testament towards its evangelical conclusion, is the tragedy of men who had revolted being chastised and repenting; they are the storms of the outraged divine Love. By effacing all the shades, our Moderns have banished all contrast, and their indistinct light vexes. There is no longer a History, and everything appears unreal. Yahweh’s witnesses are all wearing jellabas, but morally they are in modern dress. They are without any need of God and passionless, in the midst of nations that are profoundly indifferent to invisible realities. The Old Testament is represented in the likeness of our Godless world through which pass great visionaries animated by a grand interior dream… Christ’s coming seems to be announced to a people that pays no attention. We are far from the true Bible! »
The Gospel and the Apostolic Writings are similarly misrepresented, defaced, corrupted. Our Father analyses each text that is quoted, flushing out the authors’ bias:
« In the account of the pilgrims of Emmaus, the biblical expressions “He broke the bread and gave it to them”, “They recognised Him in the breaking of the bread”, becomes “He shared the bread”, “They recognised him at the sharing out of the bread”. Already the account of the Last Supper presented the same modifications: “He shared out the bread” and, further on, “This is My Body given for you” (text 42). We will again find the same alteration at text 53: “They were faithful to the sharing out of the bread and to prayers.” The “Body delivered for you”, the “breaking of the bread” of the sacred text are liturgical expressions that evoke the victim’s immolation. The “Body given” and the “sharing out of the bread” are Fr. Chenu’s Socialist slogans.
« In the conclusion to Matthew, when Jesus sends His Apostles to teach the Gospel to all nations, we are no longer surprised to see Christ’s orders toned down through selection and falsification. Selection, because our bishops prefer Matthew to Mark, according to whom “he who does not believe will be condemned”. Falsification, because they make alterations to Matthew. “Go, therefore, teach all nations” becomes: “Go, therefore, and make disciples from all nations”, which is more liberal. And “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” becomes: “Teach them to live as I asked you to do”, which is very feeble.
« Basically, everything is contained in these two examples: the mystery of the dogmas become the vaguest humanitarian symbolism, and the divine Commandments become humble “requests” of our bishops to the men of our time, without it ever being a question of condemning anyone. They have made, quite truly, a God in their likeness. They have reduced the divine Word to the level of their vain discourse. » (CRC n° 14, p. 9)
When at last they quote Apocalypse 21:5 in order to justify their myth, « The One who sat on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new” », our Father warns them: « I guarantee you that it refers to something other than aggiornamento, ecumenism, and Masdu… » To convince oneself, it suffices to quote verses 6-8:
« It is done, he also said to me, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give a gift from the spring of life-giving water. The victor will inherit these gifts, and I shall be his God, and he will be My son. But as for cowards, the unfaithful, the depraved, murderers, the unchaste, sorcerers, idol-worshipers, and deceivers of every sort, their lot is in the burning pool of fire and sulphur, which is the second death. » (Ap 21:6-8)
THE TRIUMPH OF MODERNISM
However much the authors of the New Catechisms and their episcopal protectors concealed their intentions, the Abbé de Nantes, by his brilliant faith and capacity for controversy, had unmasked their « total modernism »:
« This systematic falsification of the Faith that we have finished studying presents itself with a title that is doubly usurped: it is an “Introduction to the Catholic Faith”, and it is the “Dutch Catechism”. In this way we are made to understand that it is indeed a Catholic Catechism, but rethought and reinterpreted by the Dutch in step with science and the needs of modern man. The pluralism that protected its irruption into the Church is only apparent and opportune, in order to win the time needed to give this book its place among the accepted catechisms. The Dutch, however, are quite convinced that only their translation of the ancient Creed into modern language will subsist as definitive in the end, because it alone is acceptable to men of our time. Putting all evolutionism to one side, they think that their new vision of Christianity is the only one possible, the only one acceptable, thus the true one. If progress is still to be made, it will be in abandoning carefully calculated equivocations and other precautions of language that aim at avoiding scandalising the weak. When the prudent wrappings of their message fall away, a complete Modernism will arise, freed from all its dogmatic and moral constrictions. Christianity’s great and decisive moulting will take place; at last the true Gospel message will be born that will discard all the outdated forms of Roman Catholicism... » (CRC n° 35, p. 13)
What can be done? Appeal to the supreme Authority of the Church.
THE APPEAL TO ROME
In May 1969, at the end of four months of the Crusade against the New Catechism, the Abbé de Nantes entitled his editorial: « This Work Will Succeed!... The hail of warnings and bans do not impress us. On the contrary, they help our Crusade. They slander us, terrorise the faithful, claim to be followers of the Pope, the Council, the Holy Spirit. But there is no one to come demonstrate to us in public that two plus two equals five…
« Fear condemns them; they are all defeated by default. We went through thirty cities, piercing the clergy with remorse for their heresy and awakening the faithful people who came in droves when we passed through. It must be explained, recognised what religious war has arisen in this country. Then the appeal to Rome will be inevitable. Salvation lies in it because it was said to only one person: “You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of Hell will not prevail over her”
« This rock is Rome in the continuity of her Pontiffs. »
Our Father concluded: « We will not stop in our Crusade until we have obtained Rome’s infallible judgement, the condemnation of this new catechism and of the new religion that it conveys. » (CRC n° 20, p. 2) And, in his Confidential Letter of 17 May, he announced to his friends that after the summer break, the Crusade would resume in autumn.
But on Friday, 23 May, the Abbé de Nantes was summoned to Bishop’s house in Troyes to receive notice from Cardinal Lefebvre of a « formula of retraction and unconditional submission to the Pope and the bishops ». He challenged the very person of the mediator, since Cardinal Lefebvre stood as guarantor for the heresy of the new French catechism. On the following 9 August, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published a notification according to which the Abbé de Nantes « disqualified the totality of his writings and his activities by which he claims to serve the Church ». In reality, Cardinal Lefebvre and the Roman Congregation had acted on order to the Holy Father, who sided with the innovators. Our Father would accuse him of this in 1973:
« Why was our effort not successful? Because you stood in the way of it, Most Holy Father! You chose Cardinal Lefebvre, a member of the Holy Office and one of my judges, but also the one who, in his capacity of Chairman of the Gallican Episcopate, bore the greatest responsibility for this doctrinal rottenness, for this corruption of millions of innocent people, to present me with an ultimatum to recant and keep quiet. And when I refused to regard one who had shown himself so false and unworthy as the authoritative representative of the Holy See, you applied to me your rough Justice.
« I was declared disqualified, which brought our Crusade to an end.
« It will be no use your saying, at the Judgement Seat of God, that you did not know anything about it. Such excuses do not hold water, up there. And if you should at some time bring forward such an excuse before the Tribunal of Rome, then I myself will contest it. I know your bishops, our priests, our well-meaning catechists, well enough. If it had not been for your active support of that handful of poisoners – already known to and indeed shifted from their posts by Pius XII – then the good old Catechism would have gone on being taught, with its sound Catholic contents and teaching methods that are much better than those of the present works.
« If the New Catechetics is allowed to continue, it will mean an end to the Church. But clearly it will not be Your Holiness who puts a stop to it, for it is too closely entangled with your personal heresy – besides some three dozen others, all of them converging upon that Cult of Man which forms your own religion. » (Liber accusationis in Paulum Sextum, p. 29)
This is the crux of this terrible, apocalyptic tragedy that our Father tirelessly brought, even to Rome, the heart of the Church.
THE ALLEGORY OF ALADIN’S LAMP
In his letter to Mgr Dupanloup on the subject of catechisms, the Patriarch of Venice related this story:
« Teachers tell their students the story of Aladin and the marvellous lamp that he had stolen from the magician. The magician, at a certain moment, wants to take his revenge. He goes through the streets shouting: “I trade new lamps for old ones.” That seems to be an excellent bargain. It is in reality a swindle. Aladin’s wife is credulous and let herself be taken in. During the absence of her husband, she goes up into the attic, takes the lamp whose supernatural powers she is unaware of, and gives it to the magician. The scoundrel snatches it and abandons in exchange for it all his worthless sparkling brass lamps.
« This recurs: from time to time: a magician, a mystic, a philosopher or a politician passes and offers to exchange merchandise. Take care! The ideas offered by certain magicians, even though they may sparkle, are nothing but brass and will not last. Those that they call obsolete and old-fashioned are often God’s ideas, of which it is written that they will not pass. »