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!

OUR LADY OF FATIMA CAMP 2007

THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL

PASTORAL CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
IN THE MODERN WORLD (2)

(GAUDIUM ET SPES
7 DECEMBER 1965)

BY THE ABBÉ DE NANTES 

the incarnate Word and human SOLIDARITY. 

At last, we are going to talk seriously about « human solidarity » and God! Better late than never! Do you think so? When everything has been booby-trapped, distorted, and manipulated, even solid, good-sense truths, and even the dazzling lights of divine Revelation that come into this quagmire will be made up to please man and woman in their pride and their secular, democratic egoism. It is too late!

Are you sure? Most certainly. Let us take a close look at it:

32. § 1. « As God did not create man for life in isolation, but for the formation of social unity... »

The Council always thrusts forward its most scandalous errors in the first words. Here, Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s idiocies are taken for divine truths. First, Adam himself never had the choice between solitude and association. And their children had even less choice than they… So, we must follow, with all due respect, Maurras’ “Natural Politics” rather than the delusions of Rousseau’s “Social Contract”. Individualism is neither divine nor natural; rather, it is a « rebellion of the individual against the species », which is a saying of a positivist sociologist (August Comte). I would prefer to say: the rebellion of man against God’s law and, as an immediate consequence, against the communities and their leaders to whom he is required to submit. Instead of this submission, the mother of all charity towards God and neighbour, the Council only wants to recognise the existence of individuals who are swollen with the feelings of their dignity, their freedom, their vocation to blossom, to be « perfect », which makes them very demanding concerning their rights. This is why, feeling uneasy in the authoritarian context of their communities, which are all prior to them, « they form a social unity », in all freedom, by means of mutual contracts that favour their whims. Jean-Jacques, the father of (Christian) democracy has become a doctor of the Council. Let us pursue this history of man as seen by Vatican II:

« ... so also “it has pleased God to make men holy and save them not merely as individuals, without bond or link between them, but by making them into a single people, a people which acknowledges Him in truth and serves Him in holiness.” »

The quotation is taken from the dogmatic Constitution “De Ecclesia”. It contains this essentially false principle according to which individuals are first, and communities are reduced to being only contractual associations that are instituted by them and are at their service and dependent on them. Here, re-read it! The historical forgery is patent… and strictly parallel to the one that the Council committed on Adam and the human race. There were not « individual men » whom God « wanted to make into a single people », and still less what is implied: that they made themselves into a people (except in the desert when they rebelled against Moses and against their God!).

God chose Abraham and, in him, the people that would come from him, and finally all the other peoples who would enter into his blessing. What follows is an apparent correction that makes the poison acceptable because of the packaging: « So from the beginning of salvation history He has chosen men not just as individuals (!) but as members of a certain community. »

Even stated in this way it is incorrect: He chose the family of Abraham, the descendants of Jacob, who formed the Hebrew people, the twelve tribes of Israel, and all the individuals born of this race who were marked by the sign of circumcision; they were not kings or princes, but subjects.

We read a new countersense, which is intentional for the next sentence: « Revealing His mind to them, God called these chosen ones “His people”. » Notice the anteriority of the election of individuals, and the second and posterior character of a mere conventional name: “His people”.

The biblical reference (Ex 3:7-12) is obviously a blatant falsehood… for want of being able to find a single one that is in line with Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Lamennais, against Bossuet and Maurras.

Exodus 3, verse 7 are the first words of the text quoted as proof: « Yahweh said: I have seen the miserable state of My people... » Verse 9: « Now the cry of the sons of Israel has come to Me… »; verse 10: « So come, I send you to Pharaoh to bring the sons of Israel, My people, out of Egypt », etc.

No text of the Bible speaks about glorious individuals who unite to form a people in God… except for the builders of the Tower of Babel and all the rebels who resemble them subsequently! You would think that the Council is working for the Counter-Church.

As ultimate confirmation of their democratic theory, they end this first major paragraph with this : « and (Yahweh) even made a Covenant with them on Sinai. » (reference, Exodus 24. 1-8)!

Go take a look at it! This admirable text shows God proposing his Covenant to Moses followed by the elders of Israel, a people formed by birth, by race, a hierarchical people. « Moses alone must approach Yahweh; the others must not, nor must the people go up with him. » (Ex 24:2) When all had been said and reported to the people, the people said: « with one voice: “We will observe all the commands that Yahweh has decreed.” » (Ex 24:3) What follows is in perfect coherence with this institution of a people chosen by God in a theocratic manner… For example, Ex 34:29-35.

The Council did not retain the only quotation on which could be based its whole religious sociology, and beyond its whole modern ecclesiology. Here it is; I abridge it in order to retain the subject:

« When the people saw that Moses was a long time before coming down the mountian, they gathered around Aaron and said to him: “Come make us a god to go at the head of us.” » (Ex 32:1).

This would be the « golden calf », a euphemism that attenuates the horror of the blasphemy. They held a feast « in honour of Yahweh »!

« So, early the next day they offered holocausts (bulls!) and brought communion sacrifices (sacred communion with gleaming bulls!). Then, all the people sat down to eat and drink, and afterward got up to amuse themselves. » (Ex 32:6)

Between these two examples, of the people gone mad and the people gathered to listen to its legislator, to make the sacrifices of the Covenant and of communion in honour of the Living God, and to take an oath to obey His Law, is the Council going to define the Church of it desires of its will on this model of the crowd adoring its bull?

« Jesus willed to share in the human fellowship. »

Now here is the democratic theory of the societies of the Old Testament applied to the post conciliar Church. It is a powerful effort to overthrow the divine Constitution of the Church for a pipe dream of a Church that is thrown into a “popular democracy”, at the request of her qualified representatives. It is a prodigious enterprise that is only matched by the destruction of the Catholic monarchies of divine right since 1789 to the present:

§ 2. « This communitarian character is developed and consummated in the work of Jesus Christ. For the very Word made flesh willed to share in the human fellowship. »

It is not true; it is not absolutely false. Instead of saying « The Word Himself ( ipsum enim Verbum) », which implies « like all men », it should say: « Only the Word of God chose to be born » in order to be the « centre and crown of Creation, the only active member of the Church to the extent of becoming her centre and crown. ».

The following lines of the paragraph are touching:

« He was present at the wedding of Cana, visited the house of Zacchaeus, ate with publicans and sinners. He revealed the love of the Father and the sublime vocation (which the Council has still not defined) of man in terms of the most common of social realities and by making use of the speech and the imagery of plain everyday life. Willingly obeying the laws of His country He sanctified those human ties, especially family ones, which are the source of social structures. He chose to lead the life proper to an artisan of His time and place. »

Pulchre, recte, optime! Family, Work, Country are the historical communities to which individuals belong by their birth, which is not the case for the associations of individuals that have the favour of the Council. The members of a family or a nation belong to them…, and their « vocation » is to submit to them.

§ 3. « In His preaching Jesus clearly taught the sons of God to treat one another as brothers. »

It is true, but not all men, in all religious and moral states are « sons of God », to whom the Council grants this title with the obligations that Christ joined to it. The abuse is obvious.

« In His prayers He pleaded that all His disciples might be “one.” »

Once more this is true, but this union was only demanded by Jesus to His Father for His true disciples, who are members of the Catholic Church… and in a state of grace. To extend it to all sects and religions is to betray Christ.

« Indeed (where are we going!) as the Redeemer of all, He offered Himself for all even to point of death. “Greater love than this no one has, that one lay down his life for his friends” (Jn 15:13). He commanded His Apostles to preach to all peoples the Gospel’s message that the human race was to become the Family of God, in which the fullness of the Law would be love. »

Here it is frankly biased; it is booby-trapped. First, according to St. Mark, Jesus ordered to His Apostles: « Go out to the whole world; proclaim the Good News to all creation. He who believes and is baptised will be saved; he who does not believe will be condemned.” »

According to St. Matthew: « All power in Heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go, therefore, make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, even until the end of the world. »

From this, it is obvious that the Council presents the modern, secular, and anti-discriminatory obsession of the unity of the human family as the intention that Jesus had when he commissioned His Apostles, as opposed to the end of St. Mark, which is regularly passed over in silence, according to which those who do not believe will be condemned. The unity of the human race is Satan’s propaganda. It has already been belied by effects that are contrary to those of the apostolic preaching. This idea, already encountered in the Decree on Ecumenism, seems to me to be a heresy.

Furthermore, everyone linking up this way by means of love and for the universal triumph of Love results in faith being relegated to a position of secondary importance, to the benefit of a universal, human love. Now, in the commissioning, it is faith that is the first, incontestable, and decisive principle of salvation. The very precise complimentary conditions of Christian Baptism in the name of the Holy Trinity are added to it or equivalently, practicing « all » that Jesus had commanded. Here as well, the Council disregards the Word of the Lord and gravely contradicts it.

§ 4. « As the firstborn of many brethren and by the giving of His Spirit, He founded after His death and resurrection a new brotherly community composed of all those who receive Him in faith and in love. This He did through His Body, which is the Church. There everyone, as members one of the other, would render mutual service according to the different gifts bestowed on each. »

The interpretation key for this beautiful flight of oratory is missing, but as it happens, it is the first word of the following paragraph: « solidarity », which is the Satanic transcription of the « Communion of Saints ». It must be said that it is an amazing dialectical feat! Practice is another matter altogether: to found the new world on the individual freedom of three or five billion human beings, mutually choosing one another in order to live better in free associations, which themselves associate always in freedom… and love, in order to finally form the perfect human family that Christians like to call the « family of God », and finally the « Body of Christ »…

This is when one seeks to know what energy would be able to give cohesion, strength, stability to such an ensemble in order to counterbalance the centrifugal force of freedom by a universally distributed centripetal force. Well, it is « solidarity ». With this word, dialectical equilibrium is achieved: on level ground it holds water.

But in reality? This is where the Council contributes its brilliant guarantee of « feasibility ». It is our paragraph 3. The Catholic Faith presents all its assets. It is up to the secular society to take a leaf out of the Council’s book. Thus, here it is:

Jesus Christ gave His « Spirit » to those who gave Him their faith. These millions of solitudes, if they wish, welcome this Spirit by letting themselves be led by Him. If I dare say, it is the “coagulant” of this mass of men progressing towards brotherly love. This is what the Church is. She is also the « Body » of the « total Christ », as Jesus’ Spirit spread out everywhere is its soul. This is where the notion of « charisms » intervenes. It has something that remarkably corresponds to it in biology. A « soul » in a body seems to strengthen in accordance with the needs of the orientations of the various organs. In the Church, they are the « charisms » or the exceptional gifts of the Holy Spirit to individual persons in order for them to accomplish particular local functions. This is what paragraph 3 explains.

Well! It is the perfect democratic ideal, expressed in a holy allegory. Thus, the conciliar Church proclaims how universal democracy will be able to be established in the not very distant future. Thanks to « solidarity », democracy will have been able to bring to terms the opposing forces of personalism and Socialism, tomorrow through ecumenism, then through the federation of all religions.

The true Catholic Church, however, uses the word « solidarity » freely to express precisely that feeling which exalts devotion, sacrifice, heroism. It is esprit de corps where there is truly a “body”, that is to say, a natural, historical, and thus blessed, legitimate, and “sacred” community. In such a community as this it is sometimes good to strengthen cohesion, the force of union proper to a block, to a wall, with military parades, patriotic ceremonies, gatherings of confraternities, of “corporations”, family feasts, and especially when a common enemy rouses a salutary reaction that, in order to be victorious, must be without weakness, without cracks: « faith and love » are exalted by consciousness of the danger incurred, and then agree to confront it in the name of common good.

On the other hand, all that we have seen from the Council concerning this « solidarity », which is called the « new community » of free, equal, fraternal individuals, but gathered by the Spirit, recalls to us the irruption of this strange vocabulary in political thought and in the language of the modern Church with a revolutionary meaning. The word « solidarity » confirms our interpretation of this article 32; the Church of their dreams, of tomorrow uses the strongest words of the sacred vocabulary of our Catholic religion, but with the aim to gathering, according to the new Spirit, all their « militants » in a « solidarity » of free association that is decided to fight against the former historical community and its present supporters. It is Satan’s “Counter-Church” that is pitted against the Roman Catholic Church, where « faith and love » are sufficient to feed the Esprit de corps, or the “communion of saints”, to the supreme sacrifice, which is martyrdom.

Having said this, one will understand the following paragraph only too well:

§ 5. « This solidarity must be constantly increased until that day on which it will be brought to perfection. Then, saved by grace, men will offer flawless glory to God as a family beloved of God and of Christ their Brother. »

Obviously, for a fine end, it is the finest! As an oracle of happiness, it is the most delightful. And as “fine filth” as my governess used to say, it is fine filth! Indeed, this « increase » in « human solidarity » progressing to its perfect accomplishment is an old and wretched antichrist dream: filth of filth! lies of Satanic men who announce the coming into history of this fanciful happiness by their ministry and from their personal or collective reign. Its first work will obviously be to rid humanity of this Catholic religion, Catholic, or evangelical, which for, let us say, two thousand years has only succeeded in pitting men against each other and has bound those whom it converts to its dogmas, practices, and its alienating, oppressive, and harmful morality and politics.

The classic example of this kind of reformer, Robespierre, began by setting up the guillotine!

There was an unfortunate defrocked priest whose name was Félicité de Lamennais. He prophesied the success of this chimera that he began to adorn with all the ornaments and marvels of religion. After Popes Gregory XVI and Pius IX had condemned him, he lost the faith and abandoned the religion of God for the cult of man alone.

I take the time to pay tribute to this genius whose followers and plagiarisers forget too often because they find in him a repelling odour of sulphur. I want to celebrate his genius. For, in one of his books after his two condemnations, he prophesied – in around thirty pages that burn like lava flows from Vesuvius – our present and our future… if nothing is done to stop it. I summarise, but the Pope, the bishops and theologians would find more for thought than in Marx, Teilhard de Chardin and all the Acts of the Council combined. To the Popes who condemned his religious democracy, which became secular, and in the end nothing more than revolutionary and atheist in the name of the humanity of the future, he said: You condemn me? You do not know what you are doing! In a hundred years, my ideas will have won over the world, do you hear? Freedom of the people, democracy will have won over their hearts, and all powers, even ecclesiastical ones, will be devoted to them. So you Popes who are short-sighted, who are prisoners of you outdated fidelity to the monarchies of divine right and to the universal sovereignty of the papacy, if you condemn me with your infallibility that is recognised by all your faithful, and that will still be so in a hundred years, what will happen? Your successors will absolutely want to bless the libertarian, democratic, secular, and revolutionary idea, in order to have the dying Church of their time profit from it. So try to understand; forestall the catastrophe! Your infallible condemnation of my ideas, which is manifested by my excommunication, will prevent them from doing so. In the great battles to come, your Church will perish and it will be you, the Popes from 1830 and from 1850 who will be the assassins.

Well! Lamennais showed in these pages a rather remarkable flair as a “futurologist”. But he was a false prophet, I said to myself after the Council, because he overestimated not the Church but the men of the Church (as did Maurras likewise!). He did not, even in passing or by way of an impossible supposition, imagine that after the condemnations of which his work was the object, a Pope, a Council might be able ever to bring them into the doctrinal corpus, in the collection of the authentic Acts of the Church’s Magisterium, proclaimed by her « in the Holy Spirit ».

Well, it has come to be! I do not say through the extraordinary Magisterium (Gaudium et spes has really nothing but the ordinary Magisterium in content and form, and it is even less than ordinary), but through the Gnostic sect that has become her master. This paragraph 5 is, in fact, Lamennais’ political and social delusions that have been transposed into Christian mysteries, both of which are interwoven into the most insane, the most indecent, the craziest and the most blasphemous heresy. Lamennais had a childlike heart compared to his monstrous disciples.

What Holy Church did not at all succeed in doing, because she never desired, sought, or undertook this linear growth towards a universal « solidarity », is nothing other than Satanic giddiness, an eschatological replica of the Tower of Babel from the origins. To place God’s plan in this antichrist construction is a heresy. In order to introduce it into the Church, the Council does not hesitate to declare that this “final struggle” in which all men “gathered” into a single block will overthrow all « the barriers » (cf. Paul VI, 1964 Christmas Message, quoted in Letter to My Friends n^o 200, 25 March 1965, p. 3), will be the cause and the effect of the « salvation » that is given to all through the grace of Jesus Christ. God the Father will consider them all as « brethren » of His own Son, in all humanity and solidarity, with great love and contentment, to the tune of the Internationale repeated a thousand times that will rise to the ears as a caress of perfect glory.

It is crazy. It is monstrous. It is Vatican II! Lamennais was right to have prophesied that it would take place in this way. The reaction is coming, and they will be unable to escape it, dead or alive.