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!

THE WOLF IN THE SHEEPFOLD

THE GRANDE CHARTREUSE DESECRATED

A film entitled “The Great Silence” is presently being shown in movie theatres; its subject is the Grande Chartreuse. Two hours and forty-two minutes… of silence, to allow us – not to visit but to stray through the monastery of the Grande Chartreuse with a German film-maker who does not have the Faith for his guide! But he lived six months inside and had permission to film whatever he wished and to “edit” it into a presentation that has nothing, nothing at all, that is specifically Catholic… It is an extraordinary representation of the present state of the Church, which is open to the four winds since the Council in the name of religious freedom.

The Carthusian monks posed in front of a camera, which lingers for a long time over each one of them, but never on a holy image, the Holy Face of Jesus or a statue of the Virgin Mary to whom the entrance of each of their hermitages is consecrated –Carthusian monks never enter into their cell without stopping in order to recite an Ave Maria. This is an extraordinary representation of the “cult” that the Church dedicates to “man”, even in the Holy of Holies since the Second Vatican Council! In 1996, when Mgr Daucourt’s allegations exposed our Father to public condemnation, he knocked on the door of the Grande Chartreuse. Dom André, the Father General, granted him refuge for a few days but then pushed him out, telling him that he could not keep him because in the Carthusian monastery the Council is accepted « without a qualm ».

Despite this, he had undoubtedly already done too much for our Father, as he had in the past for Paul Touvier, who was “on the run”. Shortly afterwards, Dom André was sent to the United States, where he has since passed away. His successor accepted Philip Grönig’s request, which had been left without response since 1984…

Is not openness to the world “in the spirit of the Council”? And does the religious freedom that the Council proclaimed not tend to bring religions closer together? In this spirit there is nothing that resembles a Carthusian more than a Buddhist monk, like the one who is enjoying great success in Ardèche, in Plum Village. And he does even better than the Carthusians because he works for peace, as a report in La Croix informs us, in the same centre supplement dedicated to the review of this film… as well as to the pilgrimage to Mecca!

By accepting the social right to religious freedom, the Church lost the purity of Catholic doctrine, as the Abbé de Nantes demonstrated without ever being refuted. She allowed the wolf to enter the sheepfold.

HANS KÜNG IS BACK

Here is one proof among others. It is the liberty given still today to Hans Küng to carry out his devastation in the Church. This man is a devil. At eighty years of age, he “launches”, as is said in military language, a formidable offensive with the publication of his “Mémoirs et Récits” and his programmes on France-Culture to prepare us to celebrate Christmas! And we thought that he was finished, at least in France, ever since our Phalangists had heckled him on 23 April 1980 in Paris (cf. CRC n^o 154, June 1980, p. 15). He swaggers, relates his conversation with Benedict XVI, who had formerly been his protégé in Tübingen… and who now repays him in kind…

He passes himself off as a « free man ». But when asked on what specific front his “Combat for Freedom” took place, he always comes back to the “yes” to the pill that he vainly demanded of Paul VI, who said “no” in his encyclical Humanæ vitæ. Thus, this so called “theologian” is nothing but the slave of the demands of the flesh, of the world and of the Devil… like all the French, Belgian, Dutch, and other “experts” of the Council who parroted him.

In fact, their is only one who remained a free man in the midst of this generation of apostates, the Abbé de Nantes, who never ceased, and, since God still grants him life for this, does not cease to repeat: « Since we are men who are free in our faith, we have the right and the duty to demand the respect of our leaders, however highly placed they may be… »

While Hans Küng openly scorns a Roman Magisterium in which he no longer believes and places his “theologian” magisterium above all else, in this way he assures himself of world-wide fame and fortune. In the name of his “scientific” theology, he empties Catholic dogmas of their substance. An example of this is his treatment of the dogma that Hell and its eternity of pain do exist: they are myths from which we must be able to “free” ourselves. For him, the Devil and his legions are but a « mythological representation that passed from Babylonian mythology into primitive Judaism, and from there, into the New Testament. » (Être chrétien, Seuil 1978, p. 425)

What a triumph for Satan, to succeed in persuading us that Hell does not exist, or at least, there is no one in it! Not even Judas is there, as Benedict XVI himself let it be understood. So we shall not be surprised to see that he lacks firmness against error.

Benedict XVI said on the day of his enthronement that he would « face the wolves ». This was somewhat like when St. Peter saying to Our Lord: « Even if all abandon you Lord, I never will! » He denied his Master all the same, but at the cockcrow, he wept bitterly. Benedict XVI walks all too closely in the footsteps of Peter, and we hope that he will not delay in weeping bitterly: the general outcry that was orchestrated around his discourse at Regensburg is comparable to the outcry raised in the court of the high priest against Peter by a serving girl. The blackmail worked well: an “international crisis”, which was orchestrated from start to finish, put pressure on the Pope, and he made the “conciliatory gesture” that was expected of him by turning towards Mecca to “pray” in Istanbul’s Blue Mosque. This was a gesture for which the whole world praised him, but which “scandalised” in the etymological sense of the word – it was like a “stone” that causes one “to stumble” – billions of Muslim “believers” by “strengthening” them in their Muslim faith. This was not precisely the aim of Our Lord when He said to Peter: « Strengthen your brethren! »

Nevertheless, if St. Peter’s denial was an act of cowardice, Benedict XVI’s deed results from a much more serious blindness. This is illustrated by his speech to the Curia on 22 December.

CHRISTMAS WISHES TO THE CURIA

The ultimate combat that the Virgin and Satan are waging against one another in the very heart of the Pope is found in its entirety in this speech. Benedict XVI assessed the past year, which « marked our memory, he declared straightaway, by the deep impression of the horrors of the war near the Holy Land as well as the general danger of a clash between cultures and religions – a danger that hangs threateningly over our time in history. »

The only thing lacking in this lucid statement of fact is to relate it to the vision that opens the Third Secret of Fatima, the vision of « an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; it flashed and gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire ».

Let us suppose that the Pope, who knows this text that he once commented on in order to bury it, let us suppose that he comes back and exhumes it… the face of the world would be changed.

As in 1917, when Lucy, Francisco and Jacinta were favoured with this prophetic vision, « the problem of ways towards peace has thus become a challenge of primary importance », but the Pope added: « for all who are concerned about man ». This interpolated clause is surprising all the more because he specified: « This is true in particular for the Church, for which the promise that accompanied her at the outset also means a responsibility and a task: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased.” So, is it to be « concern about man » or concern… about God? What about the glory of God before all and in the highest Heaven, whence flows down onto earth the peace granted by Heaven among the men with whom He is pleased?

What is most serious is that the Pope presents « peace » as « a responsibility and a task » without consideration for the gift of God, as though the fulfilment of this promise depended on man and not on the Virgin Mary, to whom God entrusted it explicitly at Fatima. This is the reason for the four « apostolic journeys » that were undertaken this year by Benedict XVI, a Pope about whom it was said that he would travel little. But it is for the cause of peace… as he understands it.

1. IN POLAND A HEARTFELT TRIBUTE TO JOHN PAUL II

The Pope first recalled his « pastoral visit to Poland, the Country in which our beloved Pope John Paul II was born. For me, the journey to his homeland was an intimate duty of gratitude for all that he gave to me personally and above all to the Church and to the world during the quarter century of his service. His greatest gift to all of us was his steadfast faith and the radicalism of his dedication. His motto was “Totus tuus”. It reflected his whole being. Yes, he gave himself without reserve to God, to Christ, to the Mother of Christ, to the Church: to the service of the Redeemer and to the redemption of man. »

These words reveal the strong emotion and affection that Benedict XVI has for John Paul II, to the extent that he cannot not hear, even less examine the formidable doctrinal objections that the Abbé de Nantes has raised against the teachings of this Pontiff whom he considers the most pernicious in the entire history of the Church. Perhaps the Abbé de Nantes is wrong; nonetheless, it would be necessary to show him this, in order to enlighten us. Cardinal Ratzinger always refused to do this, « as a matter of principle », he said one day, by way of a judgement with no right of appeal, to a friend who questioned him on this subject.

John Paul II manifested throughout his quarter-century pontificate the same deafness to the objections that Abbé de Nantes raised against Paul VI, his predecessor. But John Paul II’s admiration for Paul VI was cold, without the slightest lyricism, or allusion to the virtues of his predecessor. There was only an adhesion to his ideas that, moreover, he went beyond. While Benedict XVI, Doctor Joseph Ratzinger, is an intellectual, his attachment to the person of John Paul II, to his daily personality, is a matter of the heart. John Paul II’s virtues seem heroic to him: when he speaks about him, the tone becomes vibrant, lyric:

« He held nothing back. He let the flame of faith consume him to his inmost depths. He showed us how, as people of today, it is possible to believe in God, the Living God who made Himself close to us in Christ. He showed us that a definitive and radical dedication of one’s whole life is possible, and that, precisely in giving oneself, life becomes great and immense and fruitful. »

CATHOLIC POLAND

« In Poland, Benedict XVI continued, everywhere I went I encountered the joy of the Faith. “The joy of Yahweh is your strONGHOLD” – this word that amid the wretchedness of the new beginning, the scribe Ezra cried out to the People of Israel who had just returned from the Exile (Ne 8.10), can be experienced tangibly here. I was deeply struck by the great cordiality with which I was welcomed everywhere. »

The Poles welcomed our « sweet Christ on earth » as the Vicar of Him whom certain of their deputies would like to see enthroned as “King of Poland”. This has nothing in common with the somewhat chauvinistic and rebellious enthusiasm that their compatriot Wojtyla aroused. Benedict XVI is quite aware of it:

« The people saw in me the Successor of Peter to whom is entrusted the pastoral ministry for the entire Church. They saw the one to whom, despite all his human frailty, the word of the Risen Lord is addressed then as today: “Tend my sheep.” (cf. Jn 21.15-19); they saw the Successor of the one to whom Jesus had said, in the district of Caesarea Philippi: “You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16.18) »

Before saying to him a few verses further on: « Get behind Me, Satan! You are an obstacle in My path… » (Mt 16.23) But it is I who add it. Nevertheless, we see that this context is quite present in Benedict XVI’s mind because he continues: « Peter, on his own, was not a rock; he was a weak and unsteady man. » And even a rock that one stumbles on, that “scandalises”, like the other day in the Blue Mosque.

« Nonetheless, the Lord wished to make Peter himself a rock, to show that through a weak human being, He Himself firmly sustains His Church and keeps her united. »

It is nevertheless true that the successors of Peter are not for all that impeccable, always infallible, and exempt from all reproach.

« Thus, the Visit to Poland was for me a celebration of Catholicity in the deepest sense. Christ is our peace and reunites the separated: over and above all the differences in the historical epochs and cultures, He is reconciliation [between Germany and Poland, to be specific]. I want to thank the Church in Poland explicitly and with all my heart for this moving experience of Catholicity. »

Yet, she is presently experiencing a profound division. In this country that is 95 % Catholic, where the Parliament is dominated by right-wing Catholics, a bill that proclaims Jesus Christ “King of Poland” was tabled on 21 December, the day before this speech to the Curia.

The bill received forty-six signatures from the elected members of the League of Polish Families (lpr), from the Law and Justice Party (pis) of the twin Kaczinski brothers, and from the Farmers Party (psl). They gave solidity to their initiative by recalling that the Virgin Mary had already been proclaimed “Queen of Poland” three hundred and fifty years earlier by King John Casimir.

This initiative was immediately criticised by several Polish bishops: « Christ has no need of a declaration from the Diet to be the king of our hearts », stated Mgr Tadeusz Pieronek, a member of the episcopate and director of the Pontifical Academy of Theology at Krakow (south). « The deputies would do better to busy themselves with their constitutional prerogatives and let religious institutions and the Church do the work that is proper to them », Mgr Pieronek declared, as quoted by the pap agency. « The deputies should rather pray and do penance; that would do them good », Archbishop Slawoj Leszek Glodz hammered out, while Mgr Jozef Zycinski, the Archbishop of Lublin (east), described the parliamentary initiative as « totally unacceptable ».

Thus, “Catholic” Poland is also like « a great city half in ruins ». It is all the more distressing because by reacting against a part of the Polish people and its Catholic deputies, these bishops are not preparing their minds and hearts for the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Yet, it will indeed be necessary to crown the Virgin Mary as Queen of Russia in order for the world to experience a great general « reconciliation ».

But this will be a greater miracle than that of 13 October 1917 when the sun was seen rising again to the zenith after having threatened to fall to the earth, a figure of what we are living through today.

« The visit to Auschwitz-Birkenau, to that place of the cruellest barbarities, of the attempt to wipe out the People of Israel » – this is not ancient history, the Pope is repeating the very terms that the President of the Iranian Islamic Republic uses today – « and thus render their election by God vain and indeed, to banish God Himself from history, could not be omitted from my travels in Poland. It was a source of great comfort to me at that moment to see a rainbow appearing in the sky as, before the horrors of that place, I cried out to God like Job, shaken by the dread of His apparent absence but at the same time supported by the certainty that even in His silence He does not cease to be and remain with us. The rainbow was, as it were, a response: Yes, I exist, and the words of the promise, of the Covenant which I spoke after the flood, are still valid today (cf. Gn 9.12-17). » These are not vain words. The Pope proves himself to be Peter’s true successor: his profession of faith confirms ours.

2. IN SPAIN, THE POPE WONDERS

The trip to Spain to which he now refers was another occasion and illustration of it. « It was under the banner of the theme of marriage and the family », the Holy Father summarised.

He did not spare his encouragement to spouses « who introduced themselves to us and spoke of their respective journeys in the Sacrament of Marriage and in their large families. » Recalling the strength of the Sacrament, the Pope did not hide his joy on seeing its fruits: « From the witness of these families a wave of joy reached us, not a superficial and scant gaiety that is all too soon dispelled », but a joy purified in the crucible of mutual support « living and suffering to the full their initial “yes” » to the point of « “losing oneself” in the Gospel sense ».

Nevertheless, there are flies in the ointment: « Before these families with their children, before these families in which the generations hold hands and the future is present, the problem of Europe, which it seems no longer wants to have children, penetrated my soul. »

Except in Portugal, which still refuses to decriminalise abortion; the Virgin Mary promised so: « In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved. »

« The modern spirit has lost its bearings, and this lack of bearings prevents us from being indicators of the right way to others. »

This is an extraordinary admission of the « diabolical disorientation » that Sister Lucy denounced: the Pope did indeed write « us »; the disorientation « prevents us from being indicators of the right way to others ». He immediately produces proof by demonstrating that he himself is unable to reply to the question that he asked: « Indeed, the problem goes even deeper. Contemporary man is insecure about the future. Is it permissible to send someone into this uncertain future? » That is to say to have children, destined for what future? « In short, is it a good thing to be a man? »

That is the crux of the matter. We would expect that the Pope would reply in the affirmative by speaking of Heaven the only goal of all our works which consists in bringing children into the world, feeding them, educating them, fighting sin in them and forming them to virtue in order to « send » them… to Heaven!

But the Pope speaks neither of Heaven nor of Hell, from which Christian parents must snatch their children with great toil.

« At this point, I cannot be silent about my concern about the legislation for de facto couples. Many of these couples have chosen this way because – at least for the time being – they do not feel able to accept the legally ordered and binding coexistence of marriage. Thus, they prefer to remain in the simple de facto state. When new forms of legislation are created which relativise marriage, the renouncement of the definitive bond obtains, as it were, also a juridical seal. In this case, deciding for those who are already finding it far from easy becomes even more difficult. »

The Pope analyses but does not condemn cohabitation. He expresses his “concern”… He uses the same “cushioned” language on the subject of homosexuality:

« Then there is in addition, for the other type of couple, the relativisation of the difference between the sexes. The union of a man and a woman is being put on a par with the pairing of two people of the same sex, and tacitly confirms those fallacious theories that remove from the human person all the importance of masculinity and femininity, as though it were a question of the purely biological factor. Such theories hold that man – that is, his intellect and his desire – would decide autonomously what he is or what he is not. In this, corporeity is scorned, with the consequence that the human being, in seeking to be emancipated from his body – from the “biological sphere” – ends by destroying himself. »

It is clear, nonetheless, that the Pope condemns this immorality, but he insists on letting it be known that it is in the name of the interest that he shows in Man!

« If we tell ourselves that the Church ought not to interfere in such matters, we cannot but answer: are we not concerned with man? Do not believers, by virtue of the great culture of their faith, have the right to make a pronouncement on all this? Is it not their – our – duty to raise our voices to defend man, that creature who, precisely in the inseparable unity of body and spirit, is the image of God? The visit to Valencia became for me a quest for the meaning of man. »

The Pope seems to not have found the answer because he condemns neither cohabitation nor homosexuality. Having expressed his « concern » in this way, he passes on.

3. IN GERMANY, THE POPE ENTERS INTO DIALOGUE

The third trip led Benedict XVI to Bavaria, another Catholic country.

« There, I was able to live unforgettably beautiful days of encounter with faith and with the faithful of my homeland. The great theme of my journey to Germany was God. » Fine! Not “man”, as in the time of John Paul II, but God. Benedict XVI insisted, while feeling once again the need to justify himself:

« The Church must speak of many things: of all the issues connected with the human being, of her own structure and of the way she is ordered and so forth. But her true and – under various aspects – only theme is “God”. Moreover, the great problem of the West is forgetfulness of God. This forgetfulness is spreading. »

Is it only a question of « forgetfulness »? The Pope seems to be unaware of the combat that the Prince of this world wages against God. Yet, he does not merely content himself with preaching a vague deism; his “theme” is that of Our Lord in the Gospel: « the Kingdom of God ».

« Thus, Jesus is the Kingdom of God in person: the man in whom God is among us and through whom we can touch God, draw close to God. »

The Pope’s concern seems to agree with that of the Blessed Virgin, whose Third Secret ends with this reference to « the souls that were making their way to God ». Yet, what is missing is preaching penance, as cried the angel with the flaming sword, and the call to the blood of the martyrs… which is replaced by the call for « dialogue ».

« To the theme of God were and are linked two themes that marked the days of my visit to Bavaria: the theme of the priesthood and that of dialogue. »

THE PRIESTHOOD

How can we not think of the shortage, the drying up of priestly vocations, which was prophetically foretold in the Third Secret in which « one after another », the clergy disappeared without being replaced…

No! The Pope merely contented himself with speaking very highly of the priestly state and of the celibacy that it requires. In order to bring God to men, the priest must be consecrated to God alone, in accordance with the beautiful verse of the psalm that « we – the older generation – spoke during our admittance to the clerical state: “The Lord is my chosen portion and my cup, You hold my lot.” (Ps 16.5) »

« Celibacy, in force for Bishops throughout the Eastern and Western Church and, according to a tradition that dates back to an epoch close to that of the Apostles, for priests in general in the Latin Church, can only be understood and lived if is based on this basic structure. The solely pragmatic reasons, the reference to greater availability, is not enough: such a greater availability of time could easily become also a form of egoism that saves a person from the sacrifices and efforts demanded by the reciprocal acceptance and forbearance in matrimony; thus, it could lead to a spiritual impoverishment or to hardening of the heart. »

« The true foundation of celibacy can be contained in the phrase: Dominus pars – You are my land. It can only be theocentric. It cannot mean being deprived of love, but must mean letting oneself be consumed by passion for God and subsequently, thanks to a more intimate way of being with Him, to serve men and women, too.

« Celibacy must be a witness to faith: faith in God materialises in that form of life which only has meaning if it is based on God. Basing one’s life on Him, renouncing marriage and the family, means that I accept and experience God as a reality and that I can therefore bring Him to men.

« Our world, which has become totally positivistic, in which God appears at best as a hypothesis but not as a concrete reality, needs to rest on God in the most concrete and radical way possible. It needs a witness to God that lies in the decision to welcome God as a land where one finds one’s own existence.

« For this reason, celibacy is so important today, in our contemporary world, even if its fulfilment in our age is constantly threatened and questioned. A careful preparation during the journey towards this goal and persevering guidance on the part of the bishop, priest friends and lay people who sustain this priestly witness together, is essential.

« We need prayer that invokes God without respite as the Living God and relies on Him in times of confusion as well as in times of joy. Consequently, as opposed to the cultural trend that seeks to convince us that we are not capable of making such decisions, this witness can be lived and in this way, in our world, can reinstate God as reality. »

It « can ». It is not obligatory.

For here is the second theme of this trip to Germany: that of “dialogue”.

TRIPLE DIALOGUE

1. Interdenominational dialogue took place during the « the Ecumenical Vespers in the Regensburg Cathedral, where, in addition to the brothers and sisters of the Catholic Church, I was able to meet many friends of Orthodoxy and Evangelical Christianity. We were all gathered together to recite the Psalms and listen to the Word of God, and it is no small thing that this unity was granted to us. » What on earth is this “unity” without anyone abjuring his errors? And before these “Ecumenical Vespers”, there was no unity, then? And after them, did this “unity” persist?

2. There was also dialogue between faith and reason at the university. Without even alluding to the outcry raised by his quotation of the Byzantine emperor in dialogue with Islam, the Pope forcefully recalled the central theme of his speech:

« Faith in that God, who is the creative Reason of the universe in Person, must be accepted by science in a new way as a challenge and a chance. Reciprocally, this faith must recognise anew its intrinsic immensity and its own reasonableness. », thanks to the increase in our knowledge, which provides it a sort of pedestal, according to the image dear to the Abbé de Nantes.

« Reason needs the Logos who was at the beginning and is our light [Logos is the Word, the Word made flesh; it is Jesus]. Faith, for its part, needs the conversation with modern reason to take stock of its own greatness and to correspond to its own responsibilities. This is what I sought to highlight in my discourse at Regensburg. It is a matter that is certainly not solely academic: it addresses the future of us all. »

How and for what reason? The Pope does not say. But it suffices to refer to the recent archaeological discoveries in the Sinai desert, which reveals the happy agreement of science and faith, in order for us to apprehend the events of God’s Covenant with mankind. The salvation promised to all those who prove themselves faithful to this Covenant to the end is at stake.

3. Interfaith dialogue was « only marginally touched on and in a twofold perspective. Secularised reason is unable to enter into a true dialogue with the religions. It remains closed to the question of God, and this will end by leading to the clash of cultures. The other perspective concerned the affirmation that the religions must encounter one another in the common task of putting themselves at the service of the truth and thus, of man. »

The Pope has already “forgotten God” as well, yet he just said that God was “the great theme of his journey”. This suddenly brings us back to John Paul II, for whom “religions” had for objective « the service of man » and not that of God, the cult of man and not that of God.

The fourth journey confirmed this:

4. IN TURKEY, THE POPE PREACHES THE RIGHTS OF MAN

« My visit to Turkey afforded me the opportunity to show also publicly my respect for the Islamic Religion, a respect, moreover, which the Second Vatican Council (cf. Declaration Nostra Aetate, n^o 3) pointed out to us as a duty. » After this captatio benevolentiæ, Benedict XVI stated that « the Muslim world today is finding itself faced with an urgent task. This task is very similar to the one that has been imposed upon Christians since the Enlightenment, and to which the Second Vatican Council, as the fruit of long and difficult research, found real solutions for the Catholic Church. It is a question of the attitude that the community of the faithful must adopt in the face of the convictions and demands that were strengthened in the Enlightenment.

« On the one hand, one must counter a dictatorship of positivist reason that excludes God from the life of the community and from public organisations, thereby depriving man of his specific criteria of judgement. »

One must counter the “dictatorship of positivist reason”, but also submit to the just requirements of scientific reason. Now, these requirements proclaim that it is completely unreasonable for a Catholic Pope to pray to God in a mosque, turned towards Mecca!

We are surprised that after this journey to Istanbul not one member of the Sacred College could be found to imitate St. Paul, who resisted St. Peter to his face in Antioch, « since he was in the wrong » (Ga 2.11). Perhaps this is why the Apostle Paul has brought himself back to our memory by the discovery of his sarcophagus (cf. insert below).

It must be said that it is enough to make him turn in his grave when he hears Benedict XVI state:

« On the other, one must welcome the true conquests of the Enlightenment, the rights of man and especially the freedom of faith and its practice, and recognise these also as being essential elements for the authenticity of religion. »

Thus, after having denied Christ and prayed to Allah in the Blue Mosque, Benedict XVI persists and signs: not only did he not preach Christ to the Muslims, but he preached the Antichrist to Christians and Muslims!

For before the Second Vatican Council, from Fr. de Clorivière through Gregory XVI, Blessed Pius IX and St. Pius X, to the Abbé de Nantes, the Church has condemned as antichrist what Benedict XVI calls today « the true conquests of the Enlightenment, the rights of man and especially the freedom of faith and its practice »

St. Pius X’s Letter “Notre charge apostolique”, which condemned the Sillon, begins as follows:

« Our Apostolic Mandate requires from us that we watch over the purity of the Faith and the integrity of Catholic discipline. It requires from us that we protect the faithful from the dangers of evil and error, especially when evil and error are presented in dynamic language which, concealing vague notions and ambiguous expressions with emotion and high-sounding words, is likely to set ablaze the hearts of men in pursuit of ideals which, whilst attractive, are nonetheless nefarious.

« Such were, not so long ago, the doctrines of the so-called philosophers of the eighteenth century, the doctrines of the Revolution and of Liberalism which have been so often condemned. » (25 August 1910, n^o 1)

Benedict XVI’s speech thus proves that since the Council, as St. Pius X said about the Sillon, « We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind. » (n^o 39) The Church has become a “Movement for the Spiritual Animation of Universal Democracy” (Masdu), since Benedict XVI manages to determine the essential criteria for « the authenticity of religion » without specifying for which “faith” he has become the spokesman. Furthermore, he already considers Islam to be an « authentic » religion, provided that it carries out its aggiornamento, as the Catholic Church did at the Second Vatican Council.

SCANDAL

The Pope only has authority for preaching to Catholic, Jews, Muslims, and all the nations of the earth Jesus Christ, and Christ crucified! He alone makes us “free” because he snatches us, through His Cross, from Satan’s slavery. Jesus Christ crucified, nailed to the Cross is the antithesis of the rights of man and of his alleged liberty.

With Pope Ratzinger, we see the Islamo-Christian “dialogue” ending up in a monstrous alliance between two antichrist “religions”: Islam and the so-called reformed religion of Vatican II, under the guise of the “rights of man”. In reality, there is no “dialogue”. There is only the monologue of the Pope who has lost all reason by failing to assess just how profoundly alien Islam is to the “rights of man”. The Archbishop of Smyrna, Mgr Bernardini, reminded us of this on 13 October 1999, at the Synod of the Bishops of Europe:

« I have lived for 42 years in Turkey, a country which is 99.9 % Muslim, and I have been Archbishop of Smyrna – Asia Minor – for 16 years. The subject of my intervention is an obvious consequence of this: the problem of Islam in Europe at the present time and in the near future. »

He only asked that « three items » be added to the file:

« 1^o In the course of an official meeting on Islamic and Christian dialogue, an influential Muslim, who was addressing the Christians taking part, stated calmly and confidently: “Thanks to your democratic laws, we shall invade you; thanks to our religious laws, we shall dominate you.”

« We would be wise to believe this, for the domination has already begun with the petrodollars, used not to create jobs in the poor countries of North Africa or the Middle East, but to build mosques and cultural centres in Christian countries of Islamic emigration, including Rome, the centre of Christendom. How can we fail to see in all this a very precise programme of expansion and re-conquest?

« 2^o On the occasion of another meeting between Muslims and Christians, organised as usual by the Christians, a Christian participant publicly asked the Muslims present why they themselves had never once organised meetings of this kind. The ever-present influential Muslim replied (and I quote): “Why should we? You have nothing to teach us, and we have nothing to learn from you.”

« A dialogue between the deaf then? It is a fact that such terms as “dialogue”, “justice”, “reciprocity”, or concepts such as “human rights”, “democracy” have a completely different meaning for the Muslims than for us. But I think that that we all now recognise and accept this. »

Except Pope Ratzinger…

« 3^o In a Catholic monastery in Jerusalem there was – and perhaps still is – a Muslim domestic, an Arab. He was a gentle and honest man, very much appreciated by the brothers, but the opposite was not true. One day, looking rather sad, he told them:

“Our leaders have met and decided that all the “infidels” must be assassinated, but you need have no fear, because it is I who will kill you, and I will do so without making you suffer.”

« We all know that a distinction must be made between the fanatical and violent minority, and the peaceful and honest majority, but the latter, once given an order in the name of Allah or the Koran, will always march in step without any hesitation. Furthermore, history teaches us that the resolute minority always manage to impose their will on the silent and self-effacing majority. »

A conclusion that is all too true!

« It would be naive to underestimate or, worse still, to smile at these three examples to which I have just referred. It seems to me that one should reflect seriously on the dramatic lesson they provide.

« My attitude is not pessimistic, despite appearances. The Christian cannot be a pessimistic, for Christ is risen and is alive; He is God, unlike any other prophet, whether genuine or otherwise. The ultimate victory belongs to Christ, but God's time can be very long, and normally it is. He is patient and He awaits the conversion of sinners. Meanwhile, He invites the Church to marshal her forces and work to hasten the coming of His Kingdom.

« I would now like to propose a serious suggestion to the Holy Father: that he organise as soon as possible, if not a Synod, at least a Symposium of bishops and pastoral workers for immigrants, particularly Muslims immigrants, and that he open it up to representatives from the Reformed Church and to the Orthodox. » (CCR n° 323, October 1999, pp. 35-36)

SCHISM

The very aim of this journey to Turkey was originally « ecumenical ». Its objective was an encounter between Pope Benedict XVI and “his holiness” Bartholomew I, the “orthodox” Patriarch of Constantinople:

« In Istanbul, lastly, I was once again able to live happy hours of ecumenical closeness in my meeting with the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I. Some days ago he wrote me a letter in which the words of gratitude welling up from the depths of his heart reminded me very vividly of the experience of communion [with schismatics!] of those days. We felt we were brothers, not only on the basis of words and historical events, but from the depths of the soul; that we were united by the common faith of the Apostles ever in our thoughts and personal feelings. »

As at the ecumenical Vespers in Regensburg.

If it is true, it is alarming! In January 1997, ten years ago, we noted and published a declaration made by this Bartholomew, that was passed on by Mgr Daucourt, Bishop of Troyes, at the very moment when he was persecuting the Abbé de Nantes: « The idea, whereby the Lord, in choosing the twelve apostles, entrusted one of them with the task of governing them, has no foundation in Holy Scripture. » (CCR n° 292, January 1997, pp. 13) And Benedict XVI says that he is united to him « by the common faith of the Apostles »?

The “Common Declaration”, signed jointly by the Pope and the Patriarch on 30 November in Istanbul, does not contain the slightest allusion to pontifical primacy, that is, to the Pope’s power of universal – in other words, “Catholic” – jurisdiction over the entire world.

Pope Benedict XVI is nonetheless the depositary of this power. But does he still believe so? We might doubt it by dint of seeing him refuse to use it. And for good reason, since he untiringly proclaims the religious freedom that was defined at the Second Vatican Council as a right of the human person to be « neither forced nor prevented » in matters of religion…

He ended with this “profession of faith”:

« Let us hope and pray that religious freedom, which corresponds with the intimate nature of the faith and is recognised in the principles of the Turkish Constitution, may find in suitable juridical forms, as well as in the daily life of the Patriarchate and the other Christian communities, an increasingly practical fulfilment. »

Here we touch the profound reason for his abuse of authority as regards the Abbé de Nantes, whom he refused to judge; but also as regards Our Lady of Fatima who also appeals in vain to his universal jurisdiction by asking him to consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart.

The Blessed Virgin is nevertheless invoked in fine, just enough to show a pious but not theological, anachronistic devotion, since it disregards the « Epiphany of the Immaculate » that St. Louis-Marie Grignon de Montfort prophesised, an event that « has been unknown until now » this saint wrote at the end of Louis XIV’s reign and was revealed by the great modern apparitions, from rue du Bac in 1830 to Fatima, Pontevedra, and Tuy.

We therefore have no recourse other than to appeal to the Immaculate with faith, hope and tenderness towards Her Heart, our refuge, whose triumph is certain… and imminent! It is about Her and Her alone that it is said:

« The Woman will crush the head of the Serpent. »

And also:

« You alone shall conquer heresies throughout the whole world. »

Brother Bruno of Jesus