He will return with his immense heart, with his heart of fire, his poor man's soul
and his smile. He will return! And the Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph!

SIXTY YEARS OF CATHOLIC COUNTER-REFORMATION
AND FRENCH COUNTER-REVOLUTION

A SON OF THE CHURCH (3)

PREPARING SAINT PIUS X’S RETURN
1973-1978

 by Brother Bruno of Jesus

I. The Complaint

Insert: Saint Pius X condemns the cult of man

II. The “Kerygma” of the « large Cross of rough-hewn trunks

III. The mystical adventure of the souls that were making their way to God

While some want to reform the Church, which is a sacrilege, for the Church is holy! Others claim to save it, when it is the Church that will save us! Our Father, the Abbé de Nantes, leads those who follow him between these two pitfalls, teaching them this prayer:

« Jesus, far be it from me to judge the Church, my Mother or to ever separate myself from her, far be it from me! I have too great a need for the nourishment that she provides me to distance myself from her for a single day, I have too many desires that she alone can satisfy to be able to consider her as alien to me. Outside the Church, there is no salvation for me either in Heaven or on earth, and if, as the Apostles long ago rebuffed the noisy children or the importunate blind man, I happened to be driven from her, O my Saviour, I would remain under the porch listening to the fraternal voices singing the divine praises and I would beckon, even then, to passers-by to enter so as to enjoy the goods from which I would be excluded. » (Mystical Pages n^o 13, July 1969, Vol. I, p. 79. In French only.)

Refusing to follow the Popes Paul VI and John Paul II, and the Second Vatican Council, that is to say all the bishops of the world, into heresy, schism and scandal, he did not however consider himself to be better than others:

« If I have not fallen, if I have not been swept away, it is through grace! Lord and Sovereign Judge of my soul, I am not the accuser of my brothers and fathers, but the heir and the companion of their struggles and of their miseries. Their fight is mine, mine helps theirs. » (ibid.)

Led by Providence right into the heat of this battle, he never let himself be distracted from its essential goal by ambition or ulterior motives:

« It has to do with the defence and illustration of the true Catholic faith, stifled by the numerous errors today abounding both within and without the Church. It has to do with the immanent and contagious apostasy which continues to grow, everywhere banishing the true faith, in capite et in membris, to the extent that the implacable enemies of our holy religion lord it over the innocent flock in the Church, and the scattered defenders of the faith find themselves reduced to silence, persecuted and ultimately excluded, a mortal sadness in their hearts. Caveant consules!

« Owing to the fact that our perfect and irreformable Catholic faith has been altered, travestied and corrupted among vast regions and populations ever since the Reform decided upon by Vatican II, the defenders of the only faith by which men can be saved find themselves discouraged, turned away, nay threatened with the direst ecclesiastical sanctions and most terrible insults from the forces of the media if they persevere in this combat.

« Thus it fares with me, I who have engaged in this struggle since the beginning of the Council. I have received an interdict from my Bishop and have had to put up with the gravest threats, and as I was unable to resign myself to this, I was immediately obliged to make my first appeal to Rome. That was at Christmas 1965, and since then I have renewed this appeal on ten occasions without obtaining satisfaction either as regards the truth or the justice of this combat, which I will pursue till my death, unless of course I am convicted of an offence. »

It is with these words that on 24 May 1998 the Abbé de Nantes announced to the Most Eminent and Reverend Lords and Fathers of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura « this Cause, as immense, he said, as my powers and my strength are insignificant and my human support non-existent; but I announce it in the unshakeable conviction of its legitimacy and in the supernatural assurance that it will soon be crowned with a happy outcome. »

This « Cause » will be the subject of our first part.

He added: « My intention in this present recourse to your Tribunal in no way relates to my person, as you well know. The only reason I ask for recent acts against me to be cancelled and rectified is for the good of Holy Church, of which I am the most lowly and unworthy servant… It is solely for our common faith, divine, Christian and Catholic, that I am led to appeal to your Tribunal, fully subordinate to and united with Peter, who continues to be the sacred Head and Pastor, the Teacher and Master of the sheep and the lambs, that he may save them all if he can, among which I am the least.

« I wish to be assured by your Supreme Tribunal, in virtue of its essential Wisdom, that Rome has kept the divine Truth of her Founder and Saviour intact, and that the Way and the Life of holy grace continues to flow from her for our earthly help and eternal salvation. »

For forty years, without ever ceasing to utter his « complaint on account of heresy, schism, and scandal », the Abbé de Nantes continued to work at reconstructing the « large city half in ruins », both by spoken and written word, proclaiming everywhere the “kerygma” of the apostolic preaching. This will be the subject of our second part.

And there were souls that lent an ear, the souls of those who were making their way to God, according to the last words of the vision of the Third Secret of Fatima. They find in the Abbé de Nantes the trustworthy guide to lead them in this mystical adventure, the subject of our third part.

I. THE COMPLAINT

« Most Holy Father, have pity on your own soul! »

From 6 August 1964, the date of the encyclical Ecclesiam suam, the charter of Paul VI’s pontificate, our Father’s great concern was for the Holy Father, as in the Secret of Fatima in which he is mentioned several times: in the second part, notably under the name of « Pius XI » and in the third part, under the mysterious figure of the « Bishop dressed in White ».

St. Pius X was canonised for the purity of his doctrine and his fortitude in defending the Catholic faith. Now Paul VI’s doctrine is diametrically opposed to that of Pius X. It can even be claimed that Pius X condemned Paul VI in advance, in his first encyclical (opposite, p. 15). Their analysis of « the religion – for there is such a one – of man who makes himself God » is identical. But Pius X condemns it, whereas Paul VI subscribes to it « more than anyone else »! and he involves the entire Church in it ever since his proclamation of the « cult of man » in Saint Peter’s aula on 7 December 1965:

« The Conciliar Church has also, it is true, been much concerned with man, with man as he really is today, with living man, with man totally taken up with himself, with man who not only makes himself the centre of his own interests, but who dares to claim that he is the end and aim of all existence...

« Secular, profane, humanism has finally revealed itself in its terrible shape and has, in a certain sense, challenged the Council. The religion of God made man has come up against a religion – for there is such a one – of man who makes himself God.

« And what happened? An impact, a battle, an anathema? That might have taken place, but it did not. It was the old story of the Samaritan that formed the model for the Council’s spirituality. It was filled only with an endless sympathy. Its attention was taken up with the discovery of human needs – which become greater as the son of the earth (sic) makes himself greater.

« Do you at least recognise this its merit, you modern humanists who have no place for the transcendence of the things supreme, and come to know our new humanism: we also, we more than anyone else, have the cult of man. » (Closing Discourse of the Second Vatican Council, 7 December 1965)

So, « how are we to love the Pope? » By listening to Pius X or by following Paul VI? By worshiping God or man? We must choose! If we profess to follow St. Pius X, we cannot follow Paul VI! Otherwise, we love the Pope « in word only », contrary to St. Pius’ recommendations. It is a tragic dilemma for those who love the Pope « not only in words, but in deeds », with the Abbé de Nantes, imploring Paul VI: « Most Holy Father, have pity on your own soul Yes, Most Holy Father, I who am a miserable sinner among sinners, dare to tell you that I suffer greatly on your behalf at the thought of God’s Judgement – so close, so inexorable – and I must entreat you to have pity on your own soul. » (Liber I, p. 70)

And the proof of this « great suffering », fuelled by a great love, can be seen in this fervent wish:

« For I am ready to be anathematised for the sake of my Brother in the Faith, Pope Paul VI! I would give my life, my all, for his betterment and conversion, for on him depend the temporal fate and the everlasting salvation of thousands of millions of human beings redeemed by the Blood of Christ, and my brothers! » (ibid., p. 69)

	St. Peter’s Square, on 10 April 1973, at noon, at the foot of the Obelisk, an impromptu press conference to explain the event to journalists.

In order to love the Pope not only in words but by acts of real devotedness, and with an extraordinary boldness, the Abbé de Nantes went to Rome to bring him his remonstrations, first in May and June 1968, during his own trial, as plaintiff. Not having been found guilty of any heresy or of any schism, he came back as an accuser in April 1973 with ten brothers and around fifty representatives of a “Roman Legion” of more than 4000 members, signatories of this « complaint against our brother in the faith Pope Paul VI, on account of heresy, schism, and scandal » which is contained in a hundred pages, but which can also be expressed in a few lines:

« You do, admittedly, make references to God and even, in passing, to Christ the Son of God made Man, in that fantastic discourse of 7 December 1965. But you do not have anything to say about the Cross of Christ, or the gift of the Holy Spirit, about Baptismal Grace, indeed about the whole mystery of faith, which is the treasure of Truth, Life, and Virtue of the One Catholic Church. » (Liber I, p. 12)

The Pope refused to receive this remonstrance, the implacable argumentation of which was well known to him. Let us not forget that in 1968 he had himself informed daily about the trial. And the recantation that he emended personally, that was then submitted to the Abbé de Nantes, scarcely concealed the failure of the judges and the theologians to establish the defendant’s errors.

	Under the colonnade of St. Peter’s Square, on 10 April 1973 at 10 o’clock, the Abbé de Nantes and sixty representatives of the four thousand members of the “Roman Legion” (left) came up against an impressive barrage of carabinieri and plainclothes policemen before the Bronze Gate.

Paul VI had the “Bronze Gate” barred to our “Roman Legion”, by impressive forces: several rows of carabinieri, about twenty plainclothes policemen. Jean-Loup Perret attempted to skirt the barrier. He was noticed, arrested, searched, manhandled, and taken to the police station. Another person, not as tall, managed to pass through the “Bronze Gate” and to hand a copy of the “Book of Accusation” to Mgr Martin, the Vatican Prefect, who immediately had it brought back to our hotel in a sealed, anonymous envelope, in order to be able to say that no copy had come into the Pope’s hands. At the following day’s audience, even before they had been able to reach the door of the audience hall, the Abbé de Nantes and his brothers were barred. Even though the members of the CRC took off their badges, they were recognised and refused entry. Some of them who managed to make their way inside were snatched from their seats and expelled. One of them, however, who had obtained a seat in the diplomatic tribune, managed to jump into the central aisle when the Holy Father was taking his seat on the Sedia at the end of the audience. He handed him the book saying: « Most Holy Father,I give you the Book of Accusation of the Catholic Counter-Reformation. » Taken by surprise, the Pope took it in his hands, but policemen seized our audacious friend, and that very evening he was expelled from Italian territory for insulting behaviour towards a foreign Head of State. What an admission of guilt is this refusal to accept a book, for the sole reason that it contains an irrefutable accusation!

« This book which I am holding in my hands, our Father explained, is the essential object, value, and force of what took place on 10 April. It is the reason for our journey, for that crowd of journalists and cameramen, and for those police who blocked our way. »

This book was a bombshell :

« There is only one possible way of rendering such a bomb harmless – to take hold of it and defuse it. In other words, to take the Book and read it, in order to defuse its infernal clockwork. No one has ever prevented a bomb from exploding by throwing a cover over it. Now this is the tragedy: the Pope refused to receive us. »

In the month of November 1973, the Abbé de Nantes went to Rome once again, accompanied by Brother Gérard, in order to distribute to the members of the Roman clergy, the cardinals and priests in charge of the diocese and to the staff of the Curia, 1500 Italian copies of the LIBER.

Paul VI could not accept this Book without being canonically compelled to reply to it:

« To take the book and open it would have been the end of him. If a bomb disposal expert is unable to defuse the bomb, he will be killed by it. Paul VI has no curiosity to know what the book contains: he is familiar with the gist of it already, as the result of the Process at the Holy Office instituted against myself, at my own request, between 1965 and 1969. And as a result of that he knows also what conclusion would follow any Process against himself, were such a one ever to be opened!

« So the Pope had no other choice but to shut himself up in his Palace surrounded by police and carabinieri, having given orders to all his entourage to do the same so as to avoid any contact with this bomb; and then to use all the methods of the totalitarian system reigning in the Church for the past ten years to prevent the bulk of ordinary Catholics from coming into contact with it. My bomb would thus explode in the middle of a desert. Little did it matter if it became all the more evident by so many precautions, the damage would be minor. The strategy was perfectly conceived, decided and accomplished. It is now said, known, and recognised that Paul VI is guilty of heresy, schism, and scandal. And that’s that! No one will speak of it ever again except the handful who constitute the “so-called League of the Catholic Counter-Reformation”. »

II. THE REBUILDING OF A CITY HALF IN RUINS

THE “KERYGMA” OF THE « LARGE CROSS OF ROUGH-HEWN TRUNKS »

From 1973 on, in view of the denial of justice to him by the authorities, the Abbé de Nantes appealed to the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, and this ultimate recourse will not remain unanswered. In 1978, through a series of providential events, Our Lady of Fatima demonstrated that She had heard the appeal, responding magnificently by sending « another St. Pius X », in the person of John Paul I, « a Bishop dressed in White », the one She had announced in a vision to Lucy, Francisco and Jacinta on 13 July 1917, a vision which remained secret until 26 June 2000. But She did not wait until this far off date to inspire our Father with the courage to undertake the great toil required to « restore all things in Christ », and in the crucified Christ, and thus prepare the way for the Pope Luciani.

A PROGRESSIVE TRADITIONALISM

« I make a very clear distinction, wrote Saint Pius X to the Bishop of Cremona, between the “modern”, the fruit of serious study and diligent research, and modernism […], an error more lethal than that of Luther, because it seeks the destruction not only of the Church, but of Christianity itself. » Being a disciple of saint Pius X, the Abbé de Nantes tackles novelties with an open mind: « As for me, he will recount, 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. » (CRC n°20, May 1969)

It can be said that each of the eleven constitutions of the Second Vatican Council provoked the same enthralling temptation. In preparing for Vatican III, studying each of them one after the other, he exposed the seeds of heresy, schism and scandal, and brought to light the “post-conciliar” subversion which resulted. But also, through a new dogmatic exposition of all the controversial points, and the devising of masterful pastoral projects, he let it be understood what the providential meaning was of this unprecedented trial which the Church had been going through since 1960: « To defeat at long last the hydra of the first Lutheran Reform (1517) and that of the second Modernist Reform (1907). »

In 1973, the very year of the voyage to Rome, undertaken to lodge his “complaint” against the « cult of man » professed by the pope Montini, our Father sought out a “kerygmatic” avenue between progressivism, on the one hand, and integrism on the other. We recalled this last month as Brother Pierre had done concerning the polemic raised by Gibson’s film, the most recent episode in the battle that the two religions within the Church have been waging since the Council

« The preaching (Kérugma ) of the Word of God today should be the frank, unvarnished and paradoxical proclamation of evangelical salvation, without the rationalist, universal and timeless mediation of a philosophical system. Its locus should be in the particularity of human situations and in the questions raised by the listener who, whilst acting as the interrogator, will in turn find himself interrogated and pressed to reply to this Word which upsets his existence and his plans. » (CRC n°63, December 1972, p. 7-8)

In the autumn of 1975, the Abbé de Nantes, at the end of a series of conferences on the history of the Church, drew some conclusions from them which opened the way for future reconciliations: « In the Church, the innovator or the progressivist is always a rationalist who bends the faith to the demands of his logic. He is a naturalist who debases the splendours of divine grace to the level of human psychology. » In doing so, he gains the protection of the worldly, but produces neither miracle, nor heroism, nor holiness.

The innovator also incurs the opposition of the “integrists”, the defenders of the faith. « It is the sense of scandal and horror at proud innovation which rouses them against the heretics. They want to protect the most precious gift in the world – the Faith, the deposit of the Faith! »

Let them stay on their guard so as to avoid nourishing their pride, their ambition and their jealousy in the heat of the controversy under pretext of doctrinal rigour, as was the case of Hippolytus of Rome in the third century.

« Let the integrists beware lest, having waged a just war against the modernist heresy, they find themselves excommunicated and in schism when the Church – without them, regardless of them, and even perhaps against them – will already have rediscovered her peace and unity, far removed from their prejudices. (Integrism, Progressivism, Traditionalism, CCR n°79, October 1976)

THE PEACE OF THE CHURCH

One day, Cardinal Marty, then archbishop of Paris, wrote to our Father to tell him that he retained « an exact and painful memory of the “libellus” of accusation which you brought against Pope Paul VI ». When he was informed of this, Jean Vieux, the head of one circle of our League of Catholic Counter-Reformation, took up his pen.

« Eminence, in the name of Jesus Christ, as the Successor of the Apostles, can you positively state that the 237 quotations from Paul VI contained in the Liber are the expression of the authentic Catholic faith?

Having no illusions about the fate that awaited his letter, like so many others received by our bishops, thrown directly into the waste basket, our friend had the brilliant idea of adding:

« If you hesitate to reply, which I can understand, I would like to imagine you at least sending a word to the Abbé Georges de Nantes – and it is this which forms my request: “Monsieur l'Abbé, your accusation of heresy, schism and scandal is stupefying! What a responsibility before God you have taken on! But since you submit your personal judgement to the Judgement of the Church, I beg you to come and see me : together we will examine the incriminating texts and your arguments. For my part, I do not wish to be in error either. Let neither of us betray the Church... Come, my dear son, come...” »

Let us point out that Saint Pius X would not have waited for advice coming from our friend. The cardinal answered in an evasive manner, which was already a success. Jean Vieux went back on the offensive on Good Friday, 24 March 1978.

« Will you remain deaf to our entreaties? Will you not finally respond, in a straightforward manner and point by point, to these questions that are so grave for the Church and the salvation of souls? Will you not act like a Father, and also like a worthy successor of the Apostles, and welcome the Abbé Georges de Nantes? »

Contrary to all expectations, the Archbishop of Paris replied to him on 6 April 1978:

« Dear Sir,

« I have received your letter and I have given it my attention.

« In accordance with the advice of Pope Paul VI, I am always ready to fulfil my duties “with firmness and charity”. It is true that I allowed myself to put a question to the Abbé de Nantes concerning his attitude towards Pope Paul VI.

« For me, fidelity to the Church and fidelity to the Successor of Peter are indispensable if I am to live out my fidelity to the Scriptures and to Tradition.

« Having said that, I am disposed to receive the Abbé de Nantes and to aid him in his reflection.

« I should point out that this type of dialogue could also be set up with Mgr Etchegaray, President of the Episcopal Conference. But I myself would also be happy to receive him in a private capacity.

« Please be assured of my prayers before the Lord, especially during this Easter time.

« Cardinal François Marty Archbishop of Paris »

Our Father seized the opportunity.

« Jesus!                                                                     The 7 May 1978

« Your Eminence,

« I am very touched to learn that you have agreed to receive me and to give me firm and charitable help in my reflection, in response to a petition addressed to you by good and fervent friends. And this you say in your personal capacity, whilst indicating that such a dialogue could also be established with Mgr Etchegaray, President of the Episcopal Conference.

« I thank you for your kindness and I would like to ask you to intervene preferably at the very source, with Our Holy Father the Pope, so that He may deign to indicate the paths of reconciliation and submission open to me. For it is from Rome rather than Paris that the disagreement has come.

« For my part I am ready – and I shall be infinitely grateful to you for making this known to His Holiness Pope Paul VI – to do all in my power so that my friends, my brothers and I may regain full communion with the Sovereign Pontiff and with the episcopate in communion with Him, nothing being more desirable and more urgent today than a manifestation of the Holy Catholic Unity of the Roman Church. And this in accordance with this venerable maxim, often recalled by H.H. Paul VI: “in necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas” ».

« I am determined to respond to every invitation transmitted by your intermediary, or by Mgr Fauchet, Bishop of Troyes, or by Mgr Etchegaray to whom I am writing by the same mail, so that your charitable action may accord with his, and to go to Rome, there to study with any person delegated by the Holy Father the conditions for this desirable and greatly desired reconciliation.

« For his kindly intervention in my trials, may Your Eminence be blessed by Jesus Christ, our divine Master and Saviour.

« I am Your Eminence’s grateful servant,

« Bro. Georges of Jésus »

Cardinal Marty replied immediately.

« Monsieur l’Abbé,

« I have received your letter of 8 May last. I have read it carefully, and I thought I found sentiments in it on your part which fill me with hope.

« I was in Rome yesterday for the third centenary of Saint-Louis-des-Français, and I sent the Holy Father a copy of your letter. »

The Cardinal then proposed that the two of them meet with Mgr Etchegaray in Paris on 13 June, « at the House of the Daughters of Mary [sic] », rue Notre-Dame-des-Champs. On 13 June! The anniversary of the first manifestation of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at Fatima. In the House of the Daughters of the Heart of Mary! How can we fail to see the hand of the Blessed Virgin?

Therefore, on 13 June at 6.15 pm, our Father could be seen approaching Cardinal Marty and Mgr Etchegaray.

« I present my respects to you, Eminence. »

– “You have not changed”, replied the Cardinal, “you are still as young as ever. »

– And you, Eminence, you seem to be bursting with vitality »

The two prelates were smiling. The welcome was simple, relaxed. They went into the religious house, then into a parlour, and took their seats around a small square table made of white wood. The cardinal inquired about the community:

« Have you come from Saint-Parres-lès-Vaudes? I have never been there. Is it far from Troyes?”

– It is twenty kilometres from Troyes, Eminence.

– Are there many of you there?

– At the moment there are eleven brothers and eleven sisters.

– And some of them have taken their vows over the last few days? I read that in your Bulletin.

– Yes, Eminence, we had a clothing ceremony. »

Our Father then asked permission to explain the object of the meeting by reading a note in which he recapitulated his curriculum vitae in twelve points (below).

The first point is a profession of faith in the Holy Roman Catholic Church. In the subsequent points, the Abbé de Nantes recalls how he had been led not only to criticise the Acts of the Second Vatican Council and of Paul VI, but also to contest ideas and schismatic projects of which he had been informed.

As a result, « I was accused of weakness and treason by friends who turned away from me. »

« Yes, yes, we know, said Cardinal Marty. Naturally, we understand the sincerity of your appeal.

– I laboured for the unity of the Church at the very moment when you were unworthily persecuting the traditionalists. By maltreating them, you have thrown them into revolt and schism.

– Your views have been very clearly asserted. The episcopate is aware of them. You yourself are not in any way outside of the Church.

– That is true, Eminence, so much so that in my absence the brothers and sisters attend the parish Mass at Saint-Parres-lès-Vaudes. The parish priest gives them communion.

– Yes, of course. »

Then the theologian of the Counter-Reformation recalled his study of the Council: « Since 1971, I have carefully restudied the content of the Vatican II Reform. Indeed I had been firmly opposed to this Reform because certain innovations seemed absolutely unacceptable to me. I had therefore rejected them. When my trial at the Holy Office ended, in 1968, my Roman judges ordered me to accept all the teachings of Vatican II and Pope Paul VI. For me that was not possible. Today, I am still ready to re-examine my standpoint. I do not systematically reject change out of hand. Since my seminary studies, I have always been interested in scientific exegesis, the renewal of theology, and liturgical reform. »

Cardinal Marty acquiesced, very calmly and paternally:

« Yes, yes.

– My wish, our Father continued, is that the Roman theologians would impose on me, not a total retraction, but a formula of submission that is precise and limited. I am not prepared to sign just anything. »

Well, of course!

« We are going to send your note to Rome in the diplomatic bag, which leaves on Friday. But we will probably have to wait till autumn before we receive a reply. For the time being, it is best that this matter remains among ourselves, is it not?

– Yes, Eminence.

– Until this matter is concluded, we will remain discreet.

– I am not in a hurry, Eminence. However, I would draw your attention to the last lines of the note. As a sign of good will, I would like to see my powers of jurisdiction returned to me.

– Well, Monsieur l’Abbé, we will see Mgr Matagrin and Mgr Fauchet and do what we can regarding your celebret and your suspens.”

– Thank you, Eminence. »

Four months later, the Abbé de Nantes learned that his request had been accepted by Rome and that serious consideration was being given to it in the offices of the Secretary of State. On Friday, 20 October, Father Lucien Lefeuvre, who held a position in this dicastery, confided to a member of the League staying in Rome at the time: « I would not be betraying a secret, this ecclesiastic explained to him, if I told you that the Abbé de Nantes’ case is currently under study. A reconciliation would be desirable, for this priest does much good around him. But one must be patient. The agreement is not yet around the corner. »

Meanwhile, on the evening of feast of the Transfiguration, Pope Paul VI died and, on 26 August, John Paul I, “The Pope of the Secret” succeeded him.

This was Our Lady of Fatima’s response, but we were then unaware of this, since the Third Secret had not yet been revealed. However, the “reconciliation” process had a chance of success because Cardinal Luciani had admitted his own intimate conflicts: « “The most difficult thesis for me to accept was that on religious freedom. For years I had taught the thesis that I had learned in the course on public law given by Cardinal Ottaviani according to which only truth has rights. I studied the problem in depth and in the end persuaded myself that we had been wrong.” That phrase is the admission of a disarray – the disarray that we still feel, » our Father added (CCR no 102, September 1978).

Death did not leave Pope John Paul I the time required to examine the « complaint against our brother in the faith Pope Paul VI, the deceased Pope, on account of heresy, schism, and scandal » We were unaware that this, as well, was the fulfilment of the prophesy: « Having reached the summit of the mountain, falling on his knees at the foot of the large Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him. »

III. THE MYSTICAL ADVENTURE OF THE SOULS
THAT WERE MAKING THEIR WAY TO GOD

Although it had not been divulged, the last words of the Third Secret did not remain a dead letter during all this time of intense controversies. The vision of the transfigured Church, « the nocturnal presence of Heaven on earth » glimpsed on the « Thabor of impoverished glory » that our Maison Saint-Joseph was (September 1969) in the days following the “disqualification” incurred by our Father, and the love of the Church contemplated in the Sacred Heart of Christ, her Spouse, « as serene and peaceful as a satisfied child on the bosom of his mother, » (November 1969) did not fail to be the hidden source of the daily fight, encouraging many souls to « make their way to God ».

The first Mystical Page was already a « complaint on account of heresy, schism, and scandal »:

« Our Father who art in Heaven, I love Thee and I suffer », was written on the last page of CRC n^o 5, of February 1968, entirely devoted to protesting against the blasphemies of the Dominican father, Jean Cardonnel, from the convent of Montpellier, whose revolutionary preaching ignited the conflagration of May 68 by proclaiming that God is nothing more than « the divinisation of obscure forces at work in humanity ». This is why, this preaching brother wrote, « there is no Heaven, there is no hereafter, there is nothing else, but there is the development of all that we are. Not another world, but a different world. »

The following Mystical Page, in March 1968, is an ardent declaration of faith, hope and charity:

« From the day I believed in Thee, O Our Father, I no longer felt any displeasure…

« No nothing at all, no, I regret nothing, neither possessions nor sorrows, neither life nor death, neither tears nor laughter, nothing that has passed away leaves me with the nostalgia of “Never, never again”, while You cause to echo in my heart the promise of “Always, always more and better!” What will You give me then in this eternal future that will be able to console me for what has passed away? Your Presence, O my God, Your Face, and even, in the light of Your Glory, all these vanished goods that I will rediscover in You, conserved, brought back to life and saved. Why not think about it, when this blissful vision of peace transforms our regrets into an exhilarating expectation of imminent Heaven, and our present death into life!

« From the moment that I truly loved You, my faith has become so strong that, for me, Your Dwelling-place is for me like a place on the earth from which I am separated by nothing more than a night’s voyage. This elsewhere is present to me as a marvellous country into which I will at last be led. I will depart one evening, leaving everything, and the following morning will give everything back to me, all but evil, sin, separation and death. I am about to leave and I cannot wait to hear the siren: let the moorings be cast off. Those whom I will leave here, will I not find them there, with the others who have already crossed the sea and passed through the night? These images, these memories, this withered wreath, no, nothing remains here. But all that was spiritual splendour, sweetness of soul and pure joy will be found again on the eternal shores where You will bring us back after long wanderings. »

Not yet, Father!

From April to November 1968, the columns of the CRC were filled with the controversy against the “Fonds obligatoire” promulgated by the plenary Assembly of the episcopate to serve as a standard for the authors of new catechisms, adapted to the new doctrine of the Second Vatican Council. It is the year in which the Abbé de Nantes appeared before the Roman authorities.

He had sought to warn them in vain. His complaint became ever more vehement:

« O my God, O Father, I raise my eyes to You who dwell in the Heavens, to You I raise my eyes and I implore the end of the trial and I wait, I hope for the new day. Outside, a melting snow falls in the night, everything is cold and dreary this evening.

« So when will the sun rise again, and when the blue sky over the roofs? The trial appears long when it is too heavy. It seems as though everything melts and changes into mire; I did not think that the sky could thus fall on our heads. And paralysed, lost, I beseech You to put an end to this misery; I beseech of You, our Father, the unhoped-for dawn of the salvation of the Church. My eyes are fixed as the eyes of servants on the hands of their masters, as the eyes of a maid on the hands of her mistress. They watch for the gesture, the sign, the order which will give birth to mercy. » (December 1969)

It is above all the thought of Heaven that sustains this long patience. Described as a reflection of our human relations, by summoning up the « memory of the paradise of our holy childhood », Heaven is « the family back together again », since it is the circumincession of the Divine Persons glimpsed in the light of a family gathering: « O glorious and most lovable Trinity of God, You resemble us so much! » This is a vision as remote from quietism as it is from Jansenism. The supposed new catechism taught a pagan humanism, dismissing the notion of sacrifice on the pretext that « the child is unable to give his confidence to someone who, in his opinion, is a “victim”, in the passive sense of the word. » Word for word! The polemic against Mel Gibson’s film is nothing new. It is the eternal polemic against Jesus crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles.

The reply of the theologian, a seasoned catechist, filled the Abbé Berto with admiration. But here is the mystical response:

« O Word, O Christ, how attractive You are! How great You are! More attractive, greater than ever in this last combat of Jerusalem and this final abandonment into the hands of the ungodly which your mystical Spouse, the Church, has just relived with an oppressed heart. »

« To make one’s way to God » is to persevere in the celebration of Divine Office throughout these difficult years, according to the time-honoured tradition of monastic prayer. The Mystical Pages make us truly savour its flavour, beginning with the “First nocturn” of matins (February 1974) up to compline and the great “Salve”, « the evening kiss to our Mother, which we would never want to miss, Salve! » (March 1975)

The Mystical Pages have an aura of devotion towards the Virgin Mary which blossoms into a powerful theology:

« O most Holy and Immaculate Virgin Mary, I do not want a beauty that would deprive me of wisdom and this is why I chose You for queen and for friend –I dare not because of my sins say, with St. Bernard, for unique spouse – You, the perfect Beauty who engenders Wisdom… At these words alone my soul vibrates like the David’s harp, my spirit communes with the essential mystery of God’s works. You are the revealer of divine secrets; Your virginal maternity explains the act of creation as well as that of salvation: all the marvels of God are marked by a Wisdom radiating beauty and joy, in Love. »

Starting in May 1977, the Mystical Pages consisted in “speaking of beatitude”, until April 1978, when all had been said… since Heaven had been spoken of! But what remains is to win it, as St. Bernadette used to say, by many battles… (to be continued)

Brother Bruno de Jesus