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

ECUMENISM

(DECREE : « UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO »)

BY THE ABBÉ DE NANTES

FOREWORD

The title of this Decree gave rise to heated discussions, which is a bad sign, but very enlightening. It is the proof, admitted by the participants, that the definition of the object surreptitiously included a value judgement that would inevitably lead to its deadly conclusion. It is like these very modern and charismatic men who introduce to you the lady who is accompanying them as: « My dearly loved one »… and it must be true, and for them it is most important. But as to the value of this “to dearly love” or “to love dearly”, such an uncommon word choice inclines us to think that she is not his wife, but a preferred substitute.

It is a question of bringing about the unity of all those who bear the name of Christian and who claim it, from whatever Church or community they may come. They are divided. One would want them to be one. The traditional solution is that those who are separated – heretics or schismatics – return to the Church that they left or that had excommunicated them, by a real conversion to her Faith and her discipline. This simple, well-tried method, although it is obviously laborious and characterised by suffering for one of the two parties. This is why, in opposition to this method that is so beneficial to the Catholic Church and in veiled competition with it, the dissidents, or their descendants, advocated, first among themselves, a federation of everyone, each having equality of honour, power or rights. This was the heyday of Protestant ecumenism, thanks to the meetings of the wwc, “World Council of Churches”.

For a long time, a faction within Catholicism claimed as a necessity, or a good, an evangelical duty, a spiritual betterment, that Rome enter into this movement… and this despite Pius XI’s encyclical “Mortalium Animos” (6 January 1928).

Pope John XXIII and his advisor of the moment, Cardinal Giovanni Batista Montini, were favourable to this “ecumenical” leaning in the Church. In the opening speech of the Council, we find precisely an “opening” to the forbidden novelty, for which it was necessary to find a new vocabulary, adapted to a condemned reality that new vesture would allow to pass incognito. The usual title of the return of the separated brethren – which implied conversion too much – would be proscribed. They would speak about reunion, or reintegration, although this word was harsher, humiliating, because it was more revealing and truer…

PREAMBLE

In this insurmountable difficulty, one can only guess at the prodigious diplomacy from which the Preamble of this Decree (§ 1) emerged, all spruced up. It drips with the treachery of heresiarch periti, who were determined to dethrone the Church to the advantage of all the sects, heresies or schisms that had exited her and only live as rivals eager to supplant her. Thus, some new definitions had to be surreptitiously set down: concerning Jesus Christ, the Gospel, faith, the Church… All, however objective they have been for centuries, become subjective – one may as well say personal, at the whim of the individual – and spiritual, charismatic, arising from inspirations that the divine Spirit gives to the human soul.

THE SNARE.

Obviously, this text is literarily specious, that is, entrancing, but false. It should have immediately been anathematised; it was discussed, but, after having sat on the back burner for a year, it was finally promulgated on 21 November 1964, when a few clever corrections of details had been made to make it acceptable to the opponents.

I will take a long time and give close attention to detail; it is necessary. I must be like an elder brother who removes the fish bones that his little sisters are about to swallow!

1. « The restoration of unity among all Christians is one of the principal concerns of the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council. »

I am not reconsidering what I just said. Nevertheless, I must make myself well-understood: the unity of the true religion comes from Christ, it unites Jesus’ Church to Him, she becomes His Mystical Body, His faithful and holy Spouse. She is the Unam, Sanctam. The others, which do not belong to her, federated themselves into associations at the whim of their founders. To speak about unity among them or with us makes no sense, has no solution… apart from all these people being absorbed and disappearing, through abjuration and conversion, into the miraculous unity that Christ gives to His Church by the Holy Spirit. Thus, the « concern » of the Council is outrageous, anti-Catholic, anti-Christ. Who gave it to the Council? Officially, it was John XXIII; unofficially, it was the minority, Modernist sect, which seized control of the Council in order to lay a snare for the Church.

The « yes » to heresy is softened by the « but » of the truth that follows: « But Christ the Lord founded one Church and one Church only. » So?!

« However (sic!), many Christian communions (which claim to be “Christian”) present themselves to men as the true (ah!) inheritors of Jesus Christ. »

This is a torrential irruption of subjectivism that promotes individual or community sincerity to the detriment of God’s objective truth in Jesus Christ, which the Church teaches. Sincere opinions mushroom to the point of concealing all truth, for, without saying so, our traitors mention the Catholic Church among this throng of people who all feel and proclaim that they are true « Christians »! This is the liberalism of a Council that accepts to level so many errors with Catholic truth in order to make the Church fall into their snare.

Our traitors capitalise on ambiguity as they become the champions of the “others”, and concede to them a legitimacy that they grant themselves but that they will never have: « All indeed (what cheek!) profess to be followers of the Lord (who, nevertheless, will say to them, if they do not convert: « Depart from Me, you evildoers! I never knew you », Matthew 7.23! and the fact that Congar knew them well will not help matters!), but have different attitudes », but let us leave them to their petty quarrels (cf. Bossuet’s treatise on “The History of Variations of Protestant Churches”). Our traitors carry out their manoeuvre with incredible cleverness: « They go their different ways, as if Christ Himself were divided. »

I clarify, in order to dispel the equivocation: it is proof that they are not « Christians »…

It is too clear for our swindlers not to attempt to mislead us by perniciously concluding: « It is certain that such division openly contradicts the will of Christ. » No, Christ is not so much concerned about it as this cursed Council… because Christ does not know them; go re-read Matthew (7.22): « Many will say to Me on that day: “Lord! Lord! Did we not prophesy in Your name? Did we not drive out demons in Your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in Your name?” Here is Jesus’ answer: “You did what you wanted, but I say to you that I never knew you!”

The Council continues: « This division scandalises the world, and damages the holy cause (oh! oh!) of preaching the Gospel to every creature. »

This is diabolical perfidy. The Council advances into darkness; I advance in full light. I pose the crucial question, « reus mortis », the answer to which will mean the stake of the Inquisition for the liars: is the Catholic Church and her faithful included among all these “Churches”, all these Christians, who are divided amongst themselves and diversified by their « different attitudes »? Not a word of your text distinguishes them. In order to accomplish your cursed ecumenical projects, it is necessary and sufficient that one accept this inclusion, which is considered obvious, real and indisputable! for the trap to catch a Church. She is declared guilty of « dividing Christ », of following her own attitudes, roads different from the others, of openly opposing in this way the will of Christ, of being an object of scandal by this very fact, not only for the world, but still more for the angels and saints of Heaven.

That this accusation is levelled against the “others” whom Christ does not know and has never known is not of the slightest importance, except to prompt the good people who are deceived by these sects to flee them in order to enter the Church as soon as possible. But when this accusation is levelled against the Church in the same way as against the mob of her 359 rivals, they are the words of renegades. For it is true that division puts obstacles in the way of the holiest of causes: « the preaching the Gospel », we agree fully! but in this sense that the Gospel being understood as the lone Gospel of Christ, and since Christ is not divided, one must then tell the truth: all these sects are underhanded rivals, without a mission from Christ, rivals who harm and obstruct Catholic missions throughout the world.

I await what follows in order to learn, from this monstrous mixture of false religions with the true one, how the « holy » but execrable Council will be able to conclude that we must reconcile with all these people, and if so, how they will be able to do it without crucifying once again our sweet Saviour Jesus Christ, the divine Bridegroom of our most holy, one, and unique Catholic Church!

THE TRAPPER TRAPPED.

They are conscious of their audacity. If the notion that all Christians, individually or in small groups, have been mistaken gains sway, then they have won the battle. The Church, then, is guilty also; she must mend her ways, too, reform herself, and the slope will lead down to the year 2000 and the reunion of all sects, including the one-time Roman one, into a single “Movement for the Spiritual Animation of Universal Democracy” (our Masdu).

Thus, for thirty-three years, they have not yielded in their boldness. They are intelligent; they know that they are vulnerable starting from this Introduction. They are right: when one’s position is indefensible, and he knows it, the only chance he has is to affirm his error from the beginning. It is boldness! Because the major premise of the syllogism must be, of the two terms from which an advantageous conclusion must be made, the one to which all will give their agreement.

The first sentence of the preamble affirms the monstrous error that offends the Catholic Church, which pleases all her enemies, and which opens a wound, a dreadful dispute. For, the destabilised, dethroned Church must thus convert, but from what, to what, for whom, for what reason? By asking the question, I in turn trap them: they persist? They thus deserve anathema! Here it is:

« But the Lord of Ages… » That sounds great! Just when they are thrown to the ground, they arrogantly begin a magnificent period, already sure of vanquishing: « Dominus vero sæculorum... » I am in a cold sweat about it.

Here is this masterly text:

« But the Lord of Ages wisely and patiently follows out the plan of grace on our behalf, sinners that we are (irresistibly I think of the very Christian admonition of Bishop Cauchon to Joan the Maid at the foot of her stake, and here it is a question of stripping, shearing and slaying the Church). In recent times more than ever before, He has been rousing divided Christians to remorse over their divisions and to a longing for unity. Everywhere large numbers have felt the impulse of this grace (sic), and among our separated brethren also (thus among us) there increases (sic) from day to day the movement, fostered (I emphasise) by the grace of the Holy Spirit, for the restoration of unity among all Christians. »

Here it is stated; John XXIII had already allusively suggested it in the opening speech of the Council. It would become a categorical affirmation: the experience of each and every person has become a “theological truth”, i.e., a “source of divine revelation”, equal or superior to the initial Revelation, because it is immediate, and one of the first dogmas of this faith in the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that is granted to the Church today, in her « second Cenacle », for a new Pentecost. This is what we still hear to comfort the morale of the troops: the ecumenical movement comes from the Holy Spirit.

We have before us unadulterated illuminism and, thus, total heresy. This Spirit is not the Holy Spirit; it is nothing but an intoxicating human idea, or the Spirit of Satan whom the periti disguise as the Inspirer of the Council. What it says is false because to convince the Church it has no other argument than this appeal to the Holy Spirit.

The very words of Jesus of Nazareth, taken from the Gospel, aim to convince us that two thousand years ago He wanted this movement. He only waited for our bold, capable generation to launch it. What did Jesus say? Apparently, one can make Him say whatever he wishes. On the matter that interests us here, we have His declaration, which, I do not say, suffices to prove one group wrong and the other right. His declaration does give us, at least, sufficient warning not to want to unite anyone with anything in any manner whatever. There should most certainly be union amongst Catholics, who are unfortunately divided on ideas, morality, or temporal interests! But that there should be union among all “Christians” based on placing schismatics, heretics and their progeny in the same rank as the holy Church? What an idea! Jesus answers the question:

« Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. » (Mt 10.34), and in parallel, this: « I have come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already blazing! There is a baptism with which I must be baptised, and how great is My anguish until it is accomplished! Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division… For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one’s enemies will be those of his household. » (Lk 12.49; Mt 10.35-36)

Mind you, this makes us stop and think about this modern rage, which came from horizons diametrically opposed to the Church and her Faith, the result of a Masonic, capitalo-Socialist, technocratic propaganda and of an atheistic, rationalist philosophy, in favour of peace, frontierless, universal union, without any distinction of religion.

A new lie is needed from the outset in order to build on this tripod the ecumenism that they want to see triumph tomorrow on the ruins of the “Churches”, that is, on the ruins of the lone true Church that confronts, and she alone, the powers of Hell: the Roman Church.

The paragraph that we are going to read has an insidious way of making it believed that the matter is certain without even touching it with a word, a sentence; this leaves me stunned. Here is how they solemnly advance the capital error: « Those who invoke the Triune God and confess Jesus as Lord and Saviour belong to the ecumenical movement. » This seems obvious. Look at these hundreds of millions of individuals, « taken as individuals », in intimate relationships with God and His Son Jesus. Imagine that it happens like that. The Council oddly adds that it is then also necessary in other respects to see them « not merely as individuals (!) but also (sic) united (afterwards?) as corporate bodies. For almost everyone regards the body in which he has heard the Gospel as his Church and indeed, God’s Church. » It is not their “Church” that calls and baptises them; it is they who “baptise” their Church: the Church of God.

There you have it; there will be no mention of these “Churches”, of the way in which they sprang up, were separated from the Catholic Church, formed schisms and continued to produce “Christians”, but schismatic “Orthodox”, Lutherans, etc., each with the defects of their particular Churches. They are all “Christians”, they all believe in “Christ”, they all hear the “Gospel”, and they all have the “faith”. Very good! Well, all, or at least « almost all however, though in different ways, (we will learn nothing about these different ways) long for the one visible Church of God, a Church truly universal and set forth into the world that the world may be converted to the Gospel and so be saved, to the glory of God. »

Thus, the Church is totally overlooked, the Church which, already and from the time of Jesus Christ, responded perfectly, divinely and perpetually to these aspirations of millions of Christians, but which Vatican II does not seem to know. She existed before it. Perhaps it did not have the time to gather information on her? No, that is not the reason for this ostracism. The Council only had to say: what you are seeking is the Catholic Church. Listen to her, see her, and convert, all of you, from whatever “Church” you hold your belief, because she alone was founded by Jesus Christ, never betrayed her fidelity, and remains in the eyes of the whole world the lone « one, unique, holy and Apostolic Roman Catholic Church »!

On the other hand, verifying my preceding demonstration, the Council places its own Church on the heap of the “Churches” where Christians find themselves grouped, assembled, by chance. They are all disappointing, our own included, and the Council, thus, desired to annihilate them all in order to regain the unity of all.

Ah! it is clever… Are they ever clever, these devils! It is Luciferian… I admire and I abhor. I admire the intelligence even though diabolical, but I have an all the more divine hatred for the error that this style and this dialectic imprint on innocent souls. In any case, the ecumaniacal authors of this Preface are content with themselves:

« The Sacred Council gladly notes all this. It has already declared its teaching on the Church (an allusion to the Constitution Lumen Gentium), and now, moved by a desire for the restoration of unity among all the followers of Christ (or, as you see, agreeing to be silent on the various tendencies, Catholic here, heretical there, and schismatic elsewhere), it wishes to set before all Catholics (who are being made into fools) the ways and means by which they too can respond to this grace (horror) and to this divine call (liars!). »

The project of a world assembly of Christians, from whatever Church or community they initially come, found a general, enthusiastic agreement within the Catholic episcopate. There was joy! Well! There was no time to be lost, the periti said: we should strike the episcopate while it is hot. Let us immediately give our orders to our animators, infiltrators and recruiters so that the world’s eight hundred million Catholics be recruited « one by one » to demolish their ancient Church, to the benefit of a greater charity in the Holy Spirit, and that must be felt. In Quebec, they found the word for it: they liquidated their admirable and fervent Catholic Church in order to hand over everything appertaining to the care of their body and souls, their families, schools, hospitals, unions, everything, to the tender mercies of an Almighty and a Wisdom to which so much responsibility, finally united, had never been entrusted. This Almighty, this Wisdom was, and still is, to their misfortune, the Socialist state, the welfare state, the Leviathan state that sucks the Church dry in order to discard it now. They called it the Tranquil Revolution. In ten years, everything was done.

Then, it follows the same plan as in the decree Inter Mirifica: first, in the introduction, the false axioms, premises and definitions. That is it. Next come « Catholic principles on ecumenism »; if they are called Catholic, it is out of denomination and localisation; it is the Catholics who enter into ecumenism according to principles that have long since been those of the Protestant Churches. Thus, when the lesson will be well hammered into them, there will be nothing more to do than to implement them, in Chapter II, « the practice of ecumenism ». There are also precisions on the groups of non-Catholic Churches in Chapter III to help us better appreciate them, to strengthen unity, to the point of desiring our death to give them better health.

CHAPTER I
CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES ON ECUMENISM

Here our Judases had to fight against the intelligent minority, even over the title. They (who are they?) had announced the study of the « principles of Catholic ecumenism ». This goes straightforwardly, promptly, necessarily, delightfully, according to the theory and the practice of St. Peter Canisius, St. Thomas More, St. Francis de Sales, and Bossuet: the great public controversies, the appeal to royal power to protect the good, the usual victims of the wicked, and to repress unfair conduct; then great preaching to the people, mass conversions, the welcome and instruction of the « new Catholics », subsidies to compensate them for the loss of their belongings, finally the overflowing and pure joy of the converts and their new brethren: such are « the principles of Catholic ecumenism ».

Well, no! Obviously, this title would not do at all.

On the other hand, for a word whose place and function was changed, « Catholic principles on ecumenism », « victory changed camps, the combat changed its character »; Catholics received a code signalling that they should behave well and efface themselves discretely in a domain that was in the past and still as late as yesterday, enemy territory: “ecumenism” lay in the land of the dissidents. Yes, we will maintain our positions, but… but… but.

The beginning of this chapter (§ 2) has all the appearances of a magnificent expression of the Catholic Faith. The charity of God, the salvation by Jesus Christ on the altar of the Cross; the prayer for unity that the Son uttered to His Father « for those who would believe in Him » (one would have to be really nasty to frown); « the wonderful Sacrament of the Eucharist by which the unity of His Church is both signified and made a reality », it is so admirable!

All that Jesus had left unfinished was going to be animated, directed and made fruitful by the Holy Spirit. « Through the Spirit He has called and gathered together the people of the New Covenant, who are the Church, into a unity of faith, hope and charity », and with an opportune quotation from St. Paul to the Ephesians: « There is one body and one Spirit, just as there is one hope (…), one Lord, one faith, one Baptism » (Ep 4.4-5) »

What do we have to criticise? So, everything is saved?

I grumbled when I read what followed:

« It is the Holy Spirit, dwelling in those who believe (oh dear! Here is Luther…) and pervading and ruling over the Church as a whole, who brings about that wonderful communion of the faithful. He brings them into intimate union with Christ (and here is the Protestant charismatism that is called “Pentecostalism”), so that He is the principle of the Church’s unity. The distribution of graces and offices is His work too, etc. »

I murmur: here indeed is the criminal effacement of the specific, primary and irreplaceable role of the institution that is the Church.

But no, here it is developed… After the Holy Spirit? Yes! Do not make a tragedy out of this new quarrel between “Politics first” and the “primacy of the spiritual”. The Holy Spirit first? Yes nothing without preaching, the Sacraments, and the discipline of the Church. The Council says so very well. How can a Council saw off the foundations of its own reality?! You will read it: « But (here the “but” is a life-saver), in order to establish this His holy Church everywhere in the world till the end of time, Christ entrusted to the College (sic) of the Twelve the task of teaching, ruling and sanctifying. Among their number He selected Peter. » Good, you know all that, it is excellent. This sensitive spot in this decree on Protestant ecumenism must be noted:

« He entrusted all His sheep to Peter to be confirmed in faith (the sheep are the bishops) and shepherded in perfect unity. » This is perfect!

It gets better and better: what the Apostles began, the bishops, their successors, continued. All is well expressed, including this, which is of consequence: « Jesus Christ wills His people to increase, and He perfects His people’s fellowship in unity: in their confessing the one faith, celebrating divine worship in common (ouch!), and keeping the fraternal harmony of the family of God (ouch!). »

This would be perfect if it were not another « yes, but » trap in which we are so often caught. Nevertheless, if the Council spoke seriously in this § 2, it would have condemned what it affirmed in § 1 (introduction) and what it will say forthwith in § 3. Let us read, reflect, and not yield. Our faith is at stake.

« The Church, then, is God’s only flock (unicus Dei grex); it is like a standard (signum) lifted high for the nations to see it: for it serves all mankind through the Gospel of peace as it makes its pilgrim way in hope toward the goal of the fatherland above. This is the sacred mystery of the unity of the Church, in Christ and through Christ, the Holy Spirit energising its various functions. It is a mystery that finds its highest exemplar and source in the unity of the Persons of the Trinity: the Father and the Son in the Holy Spirit, one God. »

Thus, the Council made its fine profession of faith before Protestant ecumenism. The traditionalist minority must have felt better, comforted, reassured… Thus, they could now let the others gambol about a little in their venturesome trails! The starting signal is barely given and there they are, running at top speed to the potholes. It is insane? Pooh! Everything is insane in this Council, and we will see many more examples of it. Let us sleep, dear colleague…

Well, no! Like a child, I have let myself been had.

First by a declaration of the Father’s love which, innocently!! excludes any condition, any limit, any predestination… This will be found again when it will be a question of the election of the new Israel, which is not everyone unconditionally.

Then, this same flow of creative love enters into the Son of God and makes Him accomplish His work of salvation by His death and resurrection, so much so that all are already saved by His sacrifice of the Cross... without there being a question of doing penance, professing the Catholic Faith, receiving Baptism or practicing the Christian life. Grace passes from Christ, the head of humanity to all men, His brethren… without their being a question of actual graces and sanctifying grace, and the state of grace. The latter is given by the Sacraments, lost through mortal sin, and once again given back by the Sacraments of the Church.

Finally, I have left the Council to present, in a touching style, the gift of the Holy Spirit to all creatures: we do not know where He comes from or where He goes. This is accomplished in such a manner that no difference can be remarked among men, in any case among the Christians whom He enlightens, who adhered to the Gospel and believed in Christ… even before the role of the Church has been mentioned. Even in this life of graces, it is still the Holy Spirit who conducts everything, and disposes charisms, according to His full initiative, for the good of all.

So, where is the harm? We are going to discover it now – too late…

RELATIONS BETWEEN THE SEPARATED BRETHREN
 AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Let us begin from the indisputably true beginning:

3. « Even in the beginnings of this one and only Church of God there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle (Paul) strongly condemned. »

This was how it ended, Paul remained the undisputed head of his communities, and the protestors disappeared from the scene…

Thus the Council continues: « But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions made their appearance »; just like that « dissensions made their appearance » between whom? Did they appear between old and new Christians, among the faithful, or among the bishops? The Council does not know; it continues: « … and quite large communities came to be separated from full communion (this is the Council that invents it and cheats: there is communion and excommunication; as a door must be opened or closed) with the Catholic Church… »

They find themselves separated, just like that, as the result of a slip-up, a no-fault divorce, mutual consent, or what? As a result of heresy, or schism??? The Council will not tell it to you! If it were to give the slightest explanation, the fault of the dissidents is so obvious that it would mean the end of ecumenism. On the other hand, it spitefully points out: « … Often enough, men of both sides were to blame. »

This remark, which is made in passing, is totally criminal. I explain: a curate defrocks and gets married because his parish priest made life unbearable for him. This does not excuse the curate because he takes the pretext of a human trial to violate divine commitments. A curate denounces his parish priest because he teaches that Hell does not exist: he is right, and even though his parish priest acts towards him with maternal kindness. The plain unvarnished truth is that in these sorts of divisions, the persons, their virtues or their vices count for nothing. They are only useless, doubtful pretexts, while it is absolutely certain that the Catholic party was always completely in the right, possessed the full truth and all holiness, since he maintained his union with Christ and among His members. The separated party was the one that had error and rebellion. Thus, no ecumenism is possible « between Christ and the Devil » (2 Co 6.15)!

This is all that we will learn about the great heresiarchs and schismatics, about the Councils and the Popes who interrogated, admonished, and finally excommunicated them. Then took place the persecutions, wars, and revolutions that the innovators, the troublemakers, and brigands grafted onto the Church’s open wound. Arius, Nestorius, Luther, Henry VIII, Zwingli, Calvin are unknowns. Vatican II has no acquaintance either with these great rebels, their fanatics, nor their constant justifications; it is unaware of the continual slander that they level against the Holy Church, the calumnies that they rehash up to our day, yet we were the ones who survived them and left them in peace.

Why this silence? It is intended to make us jump in one bound from one bank to the other: from the Catholic bank on the right to the one where are found the “heresiarchs” and the obviously criminal schism-mongers. They were condemned without remission, died in this state; their successors, were, on the one hand, consciously and deliberately devoted to continuing and extending their sect, and on the other, their distant descendents, who were born Lutheran, Calvinist or Anglican, and who thus grew up perpetually innocent, had no knowledge of and wanted nothing to do with these quarrels that never concerned them. Here they are:

« The children who are born into these Communities ». Do you see the trick? Thus, all the newborns since 1900, who have been baptised Lutheran, had no choice; they do not even know what it means, and… And what? Read well: « … and who grow up believing in Christ ». I finish their mean trick: « cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and... » And what now? The crowning piece: « … the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brethren, with respect and affection. », which proves that she has no doubts about their justification, their state of grace here below and their eternal happiness in Heaven.

It is very, very well-presented. When you are on the right bank, if you want to find friends on the left bank, you must at all costs find a ship, a bridge or an airplane! Thus Conciliar ecumenism requires that you prove the founders of schisms and heresies right, or admit that their errors and crimes of rebellion have long been forgotten, in such a way that their present members, taken as a whole, are all innocent like the Lutheran child who has just been born. So, we are all brethren, because they « grow up believing (as we do) in Christ ». Since no one today knows that there is a true Faith, and still less that the true Faith is found only in the Catholic Church, this lie or this error made by a Council that is unaware if its own Faith, is essential to the Catholic ecumenical strategy.

To have faith in Christ is not to believe Christ, it is to believe the Catholic Church. Christ does not speak to me, and if He did speak to me, it would perhaps be an illusion. If it were His “Spirit” who spoke to me, the illusion would then be worse. It is the Church who speaks to me with so many miracles and proofs that I must recognise, and I recognise with happiness that she is the lone infallible witness to the truth: and I believe in the Christ of the Church, through her, because of her, and in her. On the other hand, these newborn children from Wittenberg took in Luther’s faith with their mother’s milk – it is “confidence-faith”, and their Christ, who is satisfied with this auto-suggestive confidence in order to love the sinner in his sin, is not Jesus Christ, God and Saviour.

For want of a modern, elegant viaduct to pass from one bank to the other, because it collapsed the day after its inauguration, one might look for some footbridge. This is what the Council attempts to do. Or else, remaining on the left bank one might establish certain communications with the right bank, for example by homing pigeons, by blowgun, or semaphore.

Then the Council makes itself ridiculous by convincing us that these innocent Protestants are so well equipped with our Catholic weapons that they deserve as well to be considered as Christians and thus are « correctly accepted as brethren in the Lord »! You can read it:

« For men who believe in Christ (no, they do not believe in Him) and have been truly baptised (it is precisely owing to Jesus’ undeniable liberality towards all men, mercifully recognised and imitated by His Spouse, the Catholic Church), are in communion (the half-measure here is profitable: it authorises the ecumenical fraud) with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. » Nevertheless the Council encourages itself to continue: « Assuredly (!), the differences (sic) that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church – whether in doctrine (ah! doctrine) and sometimes in discipline (nothing tragic: divorce, euthanasia…?), or concerning the structure of the Church (primacy and infallibility!) – do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. »

I interrupt in order to point out to you in this text the confirmation of the accusation that I brought against the conciliar Fathers of forgetting what the Catholic Faith is, and you are going to understand. “Theological”, that is, supernatural and legitimate faith, bearing on the Mysteries that God revealed to men, consists in dedicating blind confidence to the infallible preaching of the Church: from her, we are eager and grateful to accept everything without refusing anything, because she knows. And in this field, we do not know. Thus, the bishops, even if there were 2,300 out of 2,400 who refused to believe in the event of the Ascension, and thus in the reality of the place called Heaven, would not have half or even a quarter of the Catholic Faith: they would have lost the Faith, with mortal sin on their part. Having said this, when Protestants or alleged “Orthodox” take this, refuse that, add this vision, sacramental rite or ecclesiastical rule, they show that they took from us a mass of divine treasures, that they threw out some of them and replaced them with their cheap jewellery, in accordance with their opinions, their imaginations, or their tastes. But communion with us in the Faith? No. Nothing… And the Sacraments that they received, which the Church declared valid – she says so, thus it is true – are bound, prevented from flowering and bearing fruit in their souls, by the straitjacket of major heresy or rebellious core that they found principally in their cradle, and to which they are attached because when they reached their majority, they consented to it.

Thus, the « Catholic principle of ecumenism » set out here is ridiculous: « The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles. » It can always devote itself to doing it; it has eternity before it! « Nevertheless… » I bet that this nevertheless will allow the Council to anticipate the discussions in order to announce reconciliation as early as that moment in 1963! before we had seen its leaves or fruits: « Nevertheless, even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ’s body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brethren in the Lord by the sons of the Catholic Church. »

Here it is very difficult, and I must explain in an original way the true reason for my hesitation in saying yes or no, In this tragic alternative there is a third solution. A distinction must be made: but who and what? We will first deal with « who? » and then with « what? »

WHO ARE THESE “SEPARATED BRETHREN” IN WHOM THE COUNCIL IS INTERESTED?

There are two classes: those who haunt work sessions of Churches and communities, of the wcc, and colloquia of Catholic – Protestant – Orthodox” theologians, and Assisi, etc. They are not babies who were baptised yesterday; they are not poor innocent people. They are the brains living on the goods of the Church that their founders took in their rebellion in the past.

Ecumenism with these people is a hoax… to trick the Church and to sell themselves in their own community. Their faith belongs to their founder, to his false Gospel, to his disfigured Christ. To call them already Catholic at heart and our brethren “Christians”? They are ravenous wolves.

To see the Pope and the cardinals currying favour with them makes me indignant. They deserve only anathemas, interdicts, or severe controversies with a view to confounding them and the converting the faithful who come to listen…

The other class is that of the poor people, who are lost in the mass and have long since been dominated by the heresiarchs and their successors. They receive the truth partially, a truth that has been tampered with. When they come to adulthood, these baptised persons, these readers of the Bible, these virtuous persons profit from all that the Holy Spirit makes them savour. This has two consequences that have been verified by experience: the basis of their religion and the historical consequences of its foundation repels them and leaves them utterly distraught; by leaving this aside they are unwittingly feeding on Catholic food, which is a means of salvation for them; and, second consequence, as soon as they enter into an open and loyal contact with someone or something Catholic, they are drawn to conversion, as though they had always fundamentally been Catholic.

Unfortunately, all the manoeuvres of the Catholic ecumaniacs run counter to this movement originating in the Holy Spirit, counter to God’s truth, to Christ, to the Catholic Faith, and to the Holy Spirit who is poured into the hearts of these poor souls – and not into those of the pastors of lies.

First elucidation. Multitudes of poor souls who have been misled by their sect, and who are, however, fed on all the Catholic riches that their religious tradition has kept, are already promised to enter into the perfect communion of the Roman Church. It is not, however, their religion that is a means of salvation; on the contrary, they must flee from it, being content with the small amount of Catholicism that remains to them. The Catholic Church alone is their means of salvation. This is indeed not what the Council means. On the other hand, the proud, the masters, the pastors, the inspired persons who haunt our meetings show themselves attached to what is formally an integral part of their heresy, and they seek to rally the Church to it, with a view to strengthening their sect, perhaps to set their conscience at rest, and to keep the peoples enslaved by them in their sect. It is these people whom the Council, twisting the mind to make it succeed, persuades that they are already on the way of full communion with Rome, the Rome that they hate. If they were on the way, they would be moved to be so well awaited, welcomed… and they would convert.

WHAT? WHAT SIGN PERMITS ONE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE ELECT AND THE REPROVED?

It is quite simply the Faith. For: 1^o Outside of the Church, there is no salvation. 2^o No one can be saved unless he clings with his whole soul to the Catholic Faith. 3^o No one can lose the Faith without sin.

A constant, obvious, exhilarating fact is compelling: the Church is – excuse me, once again I am going to be treated harshly – is like a beautiful person. Each of her charms shines, but they all harmonise so strongly that it is to the “vinculum substantiale” of which Leibniz speaks, that all our admiration, our love, our devotion go. For the good and beautiful souls in expectation of a beauty that they do not find in their sect, the shock of this beauty speaks louder than all: they convert to the Church, happy to find in her doubtless gleams of truth, of virtue that they already loved in their religion.

Now, the Council manifests a liberalism, a relativism, an eclecticism, finally a totally Anglican individualism, when it displays before our eyes the several articles of our Faith, in order to count points of agreement with people lost in their forms of dissidence and, from a certain level, to declare them our brethren, in good position, already three-quarters or half way to « full communion »… This makes the Faith a material object, it is artificial, it is null and void.

To oppose this total absence of the global perception of the substance of the things that the Council shows, we say that each form of dissidence, and the one that this Council will constitute for the future centuries, particularly in its « ecumenical principles », each religion bears the mark of one man, not of two! Not of Jesus and Luther, but Luther alone. Luther modelled according to his own taste a wax figurine likeness of Jesus, but it is not “Him”. It is Jesus as “seen by Luther”.

Well! The divide is determined in accordance with the Father drawing him, Jesus touching his soul, and the Holy Spirit setting him afire. One will turn away from the Lutheran waxwork with invincible disgust, while another will attach himself to it, if not with love, at least with fury, stubbornness, an attachment to himself in this attachment to his idol.

“Bonum est ex integra causa”: whether the predestined person comes from atheism, humanism, Buddhism, Orthodoxy or Anglicanism… he adores this good, from the day he encounters the Church, be it even in her most unworthy representatives, or in the most debased eras.

“Malum ex quocumque defectu”: the dissidents, like those from the “High Church”, may well mimic the true Church even in flower vases and the exact number of prescribed swings of the censer, the chosen soul will be rightly shocked by some detail, because this detail is what Aristotle calls « the nature » of the thing, the thing that reveals its substantial foundation. In fact, our rather free conversations with “separated brothers (or sisters)”, as they defend a detail of their religion or express hatred for a charming little detail of our religion, have revealed to me the manifestation of the Spirit of Satan, for their perdition…

This lucidity, which was traditional in the Church of old, is totally non-existent in the text that we are studying. On the contrary, it is the text’s constant cunning and proclivity for error and wrongdoing that supports these pages of closely woven lies in order to end in complete betrayal to the benefit of all that is not or no longer will be Roman Catholic.

Now, I will quote the texts of the Council. It could serve as a practice exercise of the rules that I have just set out, or simply as a reminder.

THE COUNCIL PLEADS IN FAVOUR OF THE “SEPARATED BRETHREN”, WHO ARE SO RICH IN TREASURES THEY YET CONSERVE.

« Moreover, some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments that together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ. »

Question: true or false? To help you find the answer: an entire cargo arrived from Rome for the new Anglican High Church cathedral in Liverpool; nothing is missing, biretta, Paschal candle… Unfortunately these cases were soaked in a hold flooded with heating oil. Ask the Council if this sacristy is really Catholic!

THE COUNCIL ACCEPTS THE MERCHANDISE BECAUSE THE ODOUR OF HEATING OIL IS SO FAMILIAR THAT, ON THE CONTRARY, IT WILL HELP THE ENGLISH TO GET USED TO IT.

« The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation. »

Question: true or false? In order to put you on the right track: can « liturgical actions of the Christian religion » « most certainly truly engender a life of grace » only because the Council wants it so, and must we « regard (sic) them as capable of giving access to the communion of salvation (what is that?) »? Supplementary hint: Will God make His Sacrament with heating oil-flavoured hosts and wine? Incentive to find: Is God English? – Of course!

THE COUNCIL SPEAKS ON BEHALF OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, SURE OF HIS AGREEMENT!

Whatever it wants, whatever it imagines that it has demonstrated, the Council, or rather its ecumaniac mafia, attributes it to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, or rather, once the Council has pronounced itself, the Holy Spirit wants it, imposes it:

« It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient (at least, it says, it is our own way of seeing things), have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation (we are therefore wrong to pity them!). For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation (Congar, moreover, inquired about this just before the final session, directly on the white telephone: the Holy Spirit is delighted with this new promotion; He did not know that He could do this without the authorisation of the Father and the Son…) which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church », and the Church in Council secretly diverts a portion of it towards the lands of heresy and schism for their survival!

« Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as Communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those who through Him were born again into one body, and with Him quickened to newness of life – that unity which the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the Church proclaim. For it is only through Christ’s Catholic Church, which is “the all-embracing means of salvation”, that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation. »

“Yes, but”. Then: “no!” And now: “yes, but nevertheless, no”! It is not incoherence, it is the manoeuvring of the hypocrites to surprise by cunning and destroy the adversary. Here, an enormous paragraph emerges from its preceding “drifting” in order to reassure the Fathers at the time of their last vote, which was hotly contested. They found the word that settled everything, filling all the space between the yes and the no: « only Christ’s Catholic Church » is « the all-embracing means of salvation »… Streams secretly flow from her that allow all those who are not legitimate spouses to enjoy salvation. They receive from her enough treasures for them to be able to make themselves out to be what they are not. Twaddle, I am fed up. I stop for this evening!

ON ECUMENISM

4. Here we are ready to get down to the job: 1^o the Catholic Church alone is, the Unique and One Church of Christ. 2^o But there are still others who claim as much… or at least that they are part of her, a little, a lot… that is yet to be determined. There was no question of this “in the past”, but the Holy Spirit decided it is so, wills it so, makes it so: the union will come about among these 360 Churches and communities, to make the totality “one and unique” in some fashion, to make it richer quantitatively… and even qualitatively… than our poor, modern-day Catholic Church had become. So, we all walk hand in hand on the road to Unity.

Another principle: in case of contention, it is the most intelligent who yields. Thus, we Catholics yield, and we even yield in advance to the claims of others, while keeping our convictions for ourselves. This actually makes a two-faced conviction. One is for internal use only: it is categorical, our Church is the only Spouse of Christ, by Him alone she alone gives birth to the righteous for eternal life. The other one is, rather, for external use: the others have retained much of Catholic treasure… much of God’s grace, and, thus, eternal salvation. They are second-class spouses, but we must maintain good relations in case we end up living under the same roof!

INSTRUCTIONS FOR AN UNDERSTANDING AND PROGRESSIVE COHABITATION.

A thundering introduction that is worthy of anathema:

« Today, in many parts of the world (this is the media’s disinformation formula), under the inspiring grace of the Holy Spirit, many efforts are being made in prayer, word and action (this is ecclesiastical marketing, they are only words) to attain that fullness of unity which God desires, which Jesus Christ desires (we will see that it is a crude falsification of the Gospel). The Sacred Council exhorts all the Catholic faithful to recognise the signs of the times (another falsification of words from the Gospel, Matthew 16.4, of which John XXIII was the inventor: on Jesus’ lips, the expression designates the signs that will be given for the coming of the Messianic times, and precisely the miracles that Jesus Himself worked and that proved that He is the Messiah. On the lips of our bishops and Popes, we do not know what events are supposed to prove that they themselves, their Council, their projects are the realisation of a new era for a new humanity)… »

Forgive me for this profusion of parentheses; our ideological adversaries detest this process. If it makes them furious, it is because it is lively, expeditious, and exciting. In that case I take even more pleasure in it, as do our friends.

So, the atmosphere has been created, the scene is set. All there is to do now is to draw up the list of the actions to be undertaken; it is an organised self-demolition with a discrete shipping of our material, social and spiritual, moveable and immovable property to our separated brethren, who are gluttons for it.

First programme of action.

a) « First, every effort to avoid expressions, judgements and actions that do not represent the condition of our separated brethren with truth and fairness and so make mutual relations with them more difficult. »

Let us stop slandering these dear brethren!

b) « Then, “dialogue” between competent experts from different Churches and Communities. At these meetings, which are organised in a religious spirit (sic!), each explains the teaching of his Communion (noble term!) in greater depth and brings out clearly its distinctive features. In such dialogue, everyone gains a truer (sic!) knowledge and more just appreciation of the teaching and religious life of both Communions. »

A brainwashing that the Church advocates against herself, totally in favour of the others. Well done!

c) « In addition, the way is prepared for cooperation between these Communions (sic) in the duties for the common good of humanity that are demanded by every Christian conscience. »

They do not conceal that it is a pretext, a “constructive” means for making Catholics leave their “Communion”, if, that is, Catholicism still deserves this name, in order to mix them among their separated brethren.

d) « Wherever this is allowed, there is prayer in common. »

It is modestly suggested. We are not yet at the time of the days at Assisi, at Brussels, etc. But what is a « common » prayer? It is a charismatic prayer in which we abandon ourselves to the very strong feeling of being but one, when we have emptied ourselves of all prejudices, beliefs and social conventions… under the guidance of the animator, the “shepherd” of this communion, a layman, preferably a liberal Protestant…

e) « Finally, all are led to examine their own faithfulness to Christ’s will for the Church (!) and accordingly to undertake with vigour the task of renewal and reform. »

This final point deserves our attention: this meeting takes the cake. We notice that these instructions are only aimed at Catholics. For the other “Churches” a different language is intended. These decent Catholics must side with « Christ’s will for the Church ». There they are as though a mini-Council thinking about what must be criticised in order to improve, and to undertake within the Church, and against her, certainly drawing inspiration from what all the “other” communions think, say and do so much better than she!

The co-inventor of all this, Pope Paul VI, realised it a few months, a few years later… too late: it was “the self-destruction” of the Church!

A SUBVERSIVE WAR WAGED BY THE SUPREME AUTHORITY.

« When such actions are undertaken prudently and patiently by the Catholic faithful (thus, “trendy” laymen), with the attentive guidance of their bishops (a flattering role, but not creative or of someone in command), they promote… » What? The conversion of heretics? No, of course not! Then, a rapprochement among the divided Christians? Not at all, but the thing that fascinates the majority of the episcopate: « justice and truth (?), concord and collaboration, as well as the spirit of brotherly love and unity ». And the dream turns into a chimera: « This is the way that, when the obstacles to perfect ecclesiastical communion have been gradually overcome, all Christians will at last, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, be gathered into the one and only Church. »

The proposition is enormous. It reveals openly what they plan to do. At the outset, we had one and only one Catholic Church and, outside of her, a multitude of sects. But the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass was the touchstone, the essential sign, and Sacrament of the true Church… Now, when the Conciliar bouillon is swallowed in one gulp, the dividing lines disappear, obstacles are overcome, and all Christians celebrate a single Eucharist: is it the ancient one revised? In any case, it is what succeeded it.

Since it was difficult to have the betrayal accepted, they shielded themselves against any accusation of apostasy by adding to this alarming “yes”, a denial without inspiration or strength, and the text, thus amended by all the cowards of the assembly passed:

« This unity (of this future pandemonium) Christ bestowed on His Church from the beginning (indeed!). We believe (the certitude is giving way) that this unity subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose (we are about to cross the breathtakingly high footbridge), and we hope that it will continue to increase (the unity!) until the end of time. »

A PARENTHESIS ON THE OTHER MEANS, CONVERSION.

« However, it is evident (their hostile fury is at the end of their pen) that, when individuals wish for (is it thus still imaginable today?) full Catholic communion (they have such a horror for the thing that the word conversion is unbearable to them)... », thus, « this undertaking of its nature (yes! as much as concubinage) is distinct from ecumenical action. But (under duress) there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvellous ways of God. »

This hypocritical language is booby-trapped from beginning to end. People understood that the Church no longer wanted conversions, and conversions ceased: one does not embark on a galley when the crew is in the process of fleeing onto another one. The remainder of the text states so clearly. From this point heretics and schismatics get all the attention. They will speak nothing but good about them, and the Council, which exaggerates, recommends conversely to Catholics not to fear to discredit the Church as much as possible so that truth can really be held equal to falsehood, the legitimate wife to the courtesans, the latter ending up stepping out of the alleyways to walk respectably on the sidewalk. You will read this ignoble paragraph, so unworthy that the periti, with ponderous pretentiousness want to justify the unjustifiable in the following paragraph, so as not to astonish:

« For although the Catholic Church has been endowed (sic!) with all divinely revealed truth and with all means of grace (this magnificent observation is only a yes that prepares for the much desired but), yet its members fail to live by them with all the fervour that they should (what ignominy!), so that the radiance of the Church’s image is less clear (!) in the eyes of our separated brethren (about whom the Council never expressed any comparable criticism) and of the world at large (this is to treat us all like dirt!), and the growth of God’s kingdom is delayed. »

Still, am I dreaming? Have these hypocritical ignominies become the sacred words of the “authentic” Magisterium of our holy Church for thirty-three years, without revolt against and massacres of our insulters? In any case, if the growth of the Church of Pius XII was hindered, it was indeed by this generation of rotten bishops, theologians, and intellectuals who solemnly spit on the noble and beautiful face of our Mother!

Then, listen to these Judases encourage you to become perfect Christians: « All Catholics must therefore (!) aim at Christian perfection » This is an enormous requirement! Not for the salvation of souls or the glory of God, no! But it is another way of making them into increasingly shameful “Catholics”, thus increasingly ecumenical “Christians”. And it becomes even heavier: « They must, each according to his station, play his part (!) that the Church may daily be more purified and renewed. For the Church must bear in her own body the humility and dying of Jesus, against the day when Christ will present her to Himself in all her glory without spot or wrinkle »… Anglican!

I end up believing that no one ever had the courage to read these pages. Could one have read this rubbish without screaming?!

Courage? I no longer have any. There are still five paragraphs in the same spirit of clever corrosion of the one and true religion, and unsubtle disparagement of its institutions and its faithful to whom they make it a duty to admire and venerate as gifts from God the words, the works, the rites and the inventions of the other alleged Christians.

Thus, the Council invites us, « while preserving unity in essentials », without telling us that what is essential is the dogmatic Faith that heretics have chucked out, to enjoy « a proper freedom », and to take advantage of its permission to « vary liturgical rites » and to free « even their theological elaborations of revealed truth » and « that in all things they let charity prevail ». It is the renewal, without saying so, of the marvellous age-old axiom that dates from the time of St. Augustine: « In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas. » We have known and practiced it for centuries… But here, it is coarse! It is meant to introduce liberalism, criticism, and scepticism in our camp. In the other, on the contrary, you are going to see:

« On the other hand (ex altera parte), Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments from our common heritage that are to be found among our separated brethren (admire what they stole from us and what we must detest among ourselves!). It is right and salutary (æquum et salutare est, these are the sacred words from the Preface of the Mass!) to recognise the riches of Christ and virtuous works in the lives of others who are bearing witness to Christ, sometimes even to the shedding of their blood (this is an atrocious but effective marketing process: “Blood on the front page”… but it is inadvisable for a thousand reasons when the blood is Catholic!). For God is always wonderful in His works and worthy of all praise. »

These last words give me a grand idea: to reverse the order of the two preceding paragraphs, which would amount to praising Catholic works and demolishing Protestant works! I assure you that it would make its point with decidedly greater accuracy. God would be much more admirable in His Catholic works than He would seem to be anywhere else.

The following sentence is another specious argument to dissuade us from seeing and celebrating the Church’s marvels of holiness, by having us fixedly consider that what we are told, without proof, are also works of God. He accomplishes them outside of the Church, and they enrich our poor treasures with their own marvels. Everything is done to promote what the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ abhors: heretical and schismatic sects. Everything is done to make a crime out of our faith, our hope, our charity, our inexpressible happiness at being children sheltered by the one and only Spouse of Christ:

« Whatever is truly Christian (at the base of the argument are the equivocal words that are going to support the falsehood) is never contrary to what genuinely (!) belongs to the Faith; indeed, it can always bring a deeper realisation of the mystery of Christ and the Church. »

It is straight brainwashing…

Sure at last that it has dissuaded the “Christian” multitudes from even thinking about the solution of the “problem” of divisions among Christians, which is the conversion of the unfortunate “separated brethren” to the one and only, perfect Church, the Council ends by twisting the knife in the wound. Its goal is to pierce to the Heart the one, true Church and to urge her adepts to force her to capitulate by a sly text that is difficult but, above all, odious:

« Nevertheless (?), the divisions among Christians prevent the Church from attaining the fullness of Catholicity proper to her, in those of her sons who, though attached to her by Baptism, are yet separated from full communion with her. »

I stop, just long enough to show you these good bishops of the Council, full of concern for the Church and of pity for the honest and pure souls who belong to her but who groan from being separated from her. Dear bishops! They are, of course, going to conclude after all this that the best would be to convert all these unconscious Catholics who are victims of schism and heresy. But no! They are going to play on their sufferings, on their nearly being won for the Church, by crushing us all under their obsessive order: Surrender! Capitulate!

« Furthermore, the Church herself (dear Church, what concern! What dedication inspires our bishops) finds it more difficult to express in actual life her full Catholicity in all her bearings. »

Atrocious! The blackmail is infernal: if you do not march with us in the fusion of all the « Churches », you will remain in your corner, poor, outmoded, abandoned, disqualified, Roman, Latin Church, and we will be forced to say that you are no longer “Catholics” in actual life. Be careful, it is your last chance! If you do not surrender, we will proclaim your forfeiture, and all the Churches of the whole world will at last be united without you for this « common celebration of the Eucharist » where will shine out against you the true union of charity of all the Christians assembled in the Holy Spirit to be the true and definitive « Body of Christ, the communion of universal salvation. »

So, let us get started! « This Sacred Council is gratified to note that the participation by the Catholic faithful in ecumenical work is growing daily. It commends this work to the bishops everywhere in the world to be vigorously stimulated by them and guided with prudence. »

This is flattery, base flattery to make them march. And they did march!

CHAPTER II
THE PRACTICE OF ECUMENISM

There is nothing more to be done than to decree a general mobilisation in order to attain union. Yesterday, we were fond of missionaries and the accounts of martyrs and conversions: it was the splendour of the Faith that animated proselytism. Now… Read this strident introduction:

« The attainment of union (I underline) is the concern of the whole Church, faithful and shepherds alike. This concern extends to everyone, according to his talent, whether it be exercised in his daily Christian life or in his theological and historical research. This concern itself reveals already to some extent the bond of brotherhood (no! they claim to create it by this summit decision) between all Christians and it helps toward that full and perfect unity (affirming it is not what will make it come!) than God in His kindness wills. »

We are going to confirm once again in this second chapter, which gives instructions for its implementation, that ecumenism consists in destroying the Catholic Church in order to transfer her treasures, her merits, and her privileges to a union of « Christian » associations that claim