When Fr. de Nantes announced Pope Francis !

EVER since the publication of Paul VI’s encyclical Ecclesiam Suam on August 6, 1964, the Catholic Counter-Reformation (CCR) has been systematically opposed to the Council and to the successive Popes, John Paul I excepted. It examined their acts in order to denounce publicly the errors that were found in them. Today it would seem that it sufficed for Pope Francis to appear in order for criticism to give way to praise, and suspicion to confidence ! How can this change be explained ?

Is it due to lassitude ? Certainly not. As we shall see, the combat is far from being finished !

Are we joining the cause out of self-interest ? That is not the reason either ! As Brother Bruno reminded us : “ We are asking for nothing in our favour. ” Moreover, we are not under any illusion : if Pope Francis had to examine our cause today, he would not understand it, since he does not conceal his admiration for his immediate predecessors. Has he not decided to canonise John Paul II and John XXIII, exempting the latter from the miracle that is meant to attest divine approbation for the canonisation ?

In fact, the CCR is still faithful to the doctrine and the example of its founder, Father Georges de Nantes, and this is what we are going to set out to prove. It is not the CCR that has changed, but the Pope !

Pope Francis

As a good disciple of Fr. de Nantes, Brother Bruno is continuing the systematic study of the words and deeds of the Holy Father ; he has already made these the subject of several conferences and articles with abundant quotations. Their well-argued conclusion is constraining : we have a Pope who has the Catholic Faith. Not only that, but we find in his teachings elements that can already be found in the doctrine that our Father has elaborated for a Catholic renaissance. Our common faith and an absolutely similar theological outlook suffice to explain our filial support of the new Pope.

Another reason ought to convince us totally that the CCR is not betraying : Pope Francis fits the profile of the Pope of the renaissance that our Father drew up forty years in advance. It is interesting to reread these texts in order to protect ourselves from the integrist attitude that has always existed in the Church ; in each period of a crisis of the of Faith, it had its merit, but too often it transformed into a schismatic attitude.

This is the most important and original teaching that our Father learned from this brilliant study of the great crises of the Church during the year 1974-1975 : “ the discovery of the integrist peril and the recurrence of integrist schism throughout the ages ” (The Catholic Counter-Reformation, November 1975, no. 79).

In fact, history proves that “ in the Church, the innovator, the heretic, is always a rationalist who bends the Faith to the demands of his logic. He is a naturalist who debases the splendours of divine grace to the level of human psychology. ” As soon as he makes an appearance the supporters of Tradition, of its integrity and immutability rise up, “ those who are called integrists, but who initially at least, should be called defenders of the Faith [...]. It is the sense of horror at the proud innovation that rouses them against the heretics. They want to protect the most precious gift in the world – the Faith, the deposit of the Faith ! And they are right. To jeopardise the sure, exact and definitive knowledge of God’s mystery of salvation is too culpable a folly and those who do so risk losing the Faith for the sake of some purely human doctrine or passing fashion. The defender of the Faith is acting both within his rights and his duty. In this respect it is he who is the man of the future ! ”

It happens, however, that “ in the heat of the combat they have imperceptibly transformed the dogmas they were defending into a hard and cold ideology, an ideology reduced to their own measure, a kind of frantic contradiction of heresy. From that moment they cease to serve the Church and even end up causing her as much harm as they had hitherto done her good. ”

Here the lesson of history is as inescapable as it is topical. “ The Holy Spirit has assisted the Church throughout the most difficult centuries, never failing to pour the virtue of strength into the souls of saints – doctors and Pontiffs, monks and virgins, martyrs and confessors – to enable them to combat error and vanquish heresiarchs by the force of anathemas and with the help of the secular arm if necessary. Once heresy has been vanquished, however, the same divine assistance has always inspired the saints with gentleness, benevolence, patience and generosity in order to mend relations with those who were misled, to recover the lost sheep, to raise up the weak who had fallen and to dress their wounds. The Church had to sew up the rent and lead the greatest possible number of those, whom bad shepherds had led astray into heresy and schism, back to the unity of the one flock and the one Pastor.

“ It is towards this great work of pacification and reconciliation, no less necessary than that of fighting and tearing, but much more consoling, that we turn our thoughts now [1975 !] in anticipation of a certain future.

Our Father drew a resolution from it : “ The thought of the future stage of peace and reconciliation, however, overlaps with the present time of war and rigour and should bring a certain measure to the fury of combat. It also requires that those who defend the Faith keep their passions under control, lest they fall into a contrary excess and jeopardise the chances for peace by their over rigorous repression ! [...] There are some defenders of orthodoxy whose ideal is to belong to the smallest number possible, the better to excommunicate everyone else. A gloomy passion ! The Church, on the other hand, in her zealous charity strives, even during the period of repression, to detach the faithful masses and every faithful soul, from the most rigid of sects that exists, which she has the duty of condemning and cutting off. We must therefore believe that peace is possible, hope for peace, promote peace, while the war is being waged, and indeed at all times.

This has always been our Father’s attitude. Is it necessary to recall his loyal submission to Paul VI after his election to the sovereign Pontificate, despite what he knew about Cardinal Montini, or our Father’s request for reconciliation in 1978, or his reasoned adherence to John Paul II during the first months of his pontificate ? In the same vein, let us remember that Brother Bruno interpreted Benedict XVI’s speeches and acts in a resolutely favourable sense during a year, forgetting the implacable criticism that the writings of Cardinal Ratzinger deserved.

Thus it is in perfect conformity with the highroad of the CCR that today we must not only accept, but even support the work of regeneration undertaken by Pope Francis by the simple fact that his homilies, speeches, acts, and now his encyclical, reflect an exact and mystical Catholic Faith. Of course, the doctrinal errors that Vatican II helped to spread throughout the entire Church have not been condemned and the heresiarchs, far from being declared anathema, seem to be destined for the highest honours. In despite of this, the words and the attitude of Pope Francis contradict them, awakening the Catholic Faith and morality that had been asphyxiated by the pervading soft apostasy. They are creating a climate of renaissance and renewal that will eventually impose a doctrinal clarification. It will constitute a progress, a deepening of Catholic doctrine, and not simply a return to the way things were before.

Let us come back to this brilliant study of the great crises of the Church. In his conclusion, Fr. de Nantes wrote : “ Our attention was drawn not so much to the moral difficulty of conserving the Faith as to the even greater difficulty of remaining faithful to the truth while it is apparently being divided up into irreconcilable fragments by the various opposing, disputing parties. Temperamental differences between people are not the only cause of this; the cause lies further back in the doctrinal debate, whereby the Church through her saints and in her ordinary and extraordinary Magisterium threads a course between the various parties but above them all, condemning error but refusing fatal alternatives. The Church must avoid the exclusiveness formulated by even the best of her defenders in order to guard the mystery of Faith, the sacrament of salvation in its totality beyond its merely human reductions on either side.

“ We traditionalists have the impression and the certitude of holding the truth against all modern and Modernist error and we have a duty to defend the truth. Our struggle for the Faith against the assassins of the Faith is a just one. Yet we must not forget that we neither know nor embrace the totality of Truth and that by ourselves we have no infallible possession of it. If we gain a momentary victory in the restricted field of the present debate that is no guarantee against our falling into error over some quite different issue tomorrow. In order to embrace the totality of divine Truth in one grasp we should need to be the whole Church both in time and space. When, therefore, the time comes for sewing up the rent, we shall have to be led by an heroic humility and a supernatural wisdom in contrast with the assurance and hardness of our present polemic. ”

The great crises of the Church show that “ the deepest, most objective and most solid distinction between these two great attitudes, which subsist down the centuries and which divide the Christian intelligence between them, is to be sought in their understanding of the revealed Mystery. On the one side, faith, mystical (I do not say sentimental) certitude dominates ; the sense of the supernatural, of grace and of the Divine prevails. On the other side reason, logic, naturalism, humanism, man’s freedom and concern for the present world prevail. On the one side Heaven attracts the being in a state of ecstasy for an eternal life ; on the other side the earth holds back the man who is passionately concerned to make for himself a happy and independent life here below.

“ It would seem that right always and entirely lies with the Party of God, whilst wrong always and entirely lies with the Party of Man. In the end, however, the total truth always seems to emerge from a reconciliation of the two Parties, by dismissing their extremes. The total truth is always the mysterious, revealed synthesis of supernature and nature, of freedom and grace, of the twofold yet related knowledge of faith and reason that God presents and explains to men. ” Thus the theologian of the Catholic Counter-Reformation stated without circumlocution that an indispensable curb would have to be put on the integrist reaction “ in order to come to terms with what is true and just in the intuitions of the other side. The fact is that the party of Man, for all its rationalism, naturalism and liberalism and beneath its unjust rebellion against God, still retains some necessary elements of our common heritage, which it is important for us not to despise. ”

Recalling the example of St. Thomas More or of Bossuet, Fr. de Nantes enthusiastically pointed out : “ There are some saints who are remarkable for their very balance and the ease with which they succeeded in their short lives to conciliate contraries in their doctrine. This is not given to everyone ! They are so human that they are perfectly at ease with humanists, sometimes the most suspect, the least commendable. At the same time they are so spiritual that their faith remains a dazzling beacon and sure light within them. ”

Thus our Father advocated an intelligent traditionalism, which he thought would have three felicitous effects if it prevailed over the obdurate integrist reaction :

“ The first is already manifest in many places, even though it is considered by some as treason and evil. It consists in the communion that the traditionalists maintain at all costs with other Catholics in the parish, in the diocese, in the Church, refusing to confuse the Church with its cancer ; refusing to reject them both as though they were inextricable. ” Let us add that this was the primary reason for the foundation of Maison Sainte-Thérèse in Canada, far from the doctrinal fights that were tearing apart the Church of France ; our Father wanted to show that the CCR was willing to work towards this communion within the Church just as much as she was fighting to defend the Faith.

“ The second result will only appear later. It will be the recuperation of the faithful masses following the first Counter-Reformation decisions of a future Pope and a future Council. It will be a recuperation made all the more rapid and complete by virtue of our never having been separated from them by unjust anathemas.

“ The third and best fruit to expect from this traditional wisdom will be of a doctrinal, moral, liturgical and canonical order. All through this wicked reform with its train of errors and vice, the immense Church of God has never ceased to exist and consequently to adapt herself to time and necessity, to prosper and increase through the labour of her many gifted workers : theologians, apostles and missionaries. The cancer is there but invisibly the organism is fighting back and developing for its own survival. It is foolish to pretend that there can ever be a return, pure and simple, to the Church of the 1930’s. ”


It is this intelligent traditionalism based on an ardent love of the Church that allowed our Father to get the measure of the pontificate of John Paul I even before learning, by Sr. Lucy’s prophesy in July 1977 and from the Secret of Fatima revealed in June 2000, that he was “ the elect of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. ”

Even if “ between him and ourselves, between the legacy of John and Paul, which he had professedly espoused, and our League of the Counter-Reformation, there remained an insurmountable contradiction regarding precise, significant points of the Faith ” the fact remained nonetheless that appeasement was the order of the day. “ John Paul I had none of that arrogance of the Innovators, that incredible dogmatism of the New Theologians and Reformers certain of their own infallibility in everything, even in opposition to the age-old Church and her Magisterium. [their archetype was Cardinal Ratzinger become Benedict XVI, who refused to examine our Father’s objections “ for matters of principle ” in defiance of the law of the Church] John Paul I gently made them take a bath of humility, a necessary preamble to any constructive controversy, and that, let it be said in passing, is what they detest the most. ”

After the assassination of the Smiling Pope, our Father, in his unwavering confidence in the Message of Our Lady of Fatima announcing the triumph of Her Immaculate Heart and a time of peace, and prompted by his faith in the Church, concluded : “ The Church will give herself a new Pontiff. He will have the heart and mind of John Paul I. ”

Disappointed by John Paul II, and with good reason, our Father nevertheless continued waiting for the return of the Pope of the Secret.

In January 2001, when the name of our monthly bulletin, The Catholic Counter-Reformation in the 20th Century, was changed to Resurrection and then to He is Risen, this sentence inspired by the end of Hochwälder’s play, ‘ The Strong Are Lonely ’ : “ 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 ! ” was placed as an epigraph.

In the editorial of that same issue entitled : The Testament of a Martyr, Brother Bruno repeated the lessons that our Father had drawn from the brief pontificate of John Paul I : “ I shall no longer say with Dostoyevsky: beauty will save the world. Nor will I say with Maurras : monarchy will save France. Nor shall I even say, as I have myself so often thought and repeated : Faith will save the world. Now I see in the sweet light of the first martyr Pope of the modern capitalist era : it is through Poverty that a purified Roman Church will save the world. This is John Paul I’s true testament. ”

Then abundantly quoting an article of our Father of August 1984, our brother painted a portrait of the martyr Pope that proved to be a premonitory portrait of him who Providence has just granted to the Church :

“ In Rome, ” John Paul I said on September 21, 1978, “ I shall put myself in the school of St. Gregory the Great who wrote : ‘ The pastor should, with compassion, be close to each of those who are subject to him. Forgetful of his rank, he should consider himself the equal of his good subjects, but he should not fear to exercise the rights of his authority against the wicked. ’

“ For the good faithful, priests, bishops and cardinals, it was an invitation to devotion, charity and zeal rather than to debate, to self-reform rather than to destructive criticism and sterile plans for utopian reforms of the Church. As Cardinal Confalonieri said in his funeral sermon, John Paul I reminded people that they should each strive to make the world a better place, and that they could do this by at least becoming better themselves.

“ As for the bad… who were they ? Let us be frank: in the eyes of John Paul I, they were the integrists just as much as the Modernists. He had requested both of them to return to the wide open arms of the Common Father, to be reconciled with him and to receive from him the proper norms for their thinking and behaviour in the service of God and the Church. ”

His whole life long, Albino Luciani, and today Bergoglio, loved poverty and, what is rarer, practiced it : “ He also loved the poor and did not desire riches for them nor did he talk to them of the means to become rich. He, however, suffered for them and wanted the Church to practise evangelical charity in their regard. He wanted the Church to set an example, sometimes as spectacularly as the saints in olden times were not afraid to do – that is in the times before liberal capitalism and revolutionary socialism.

“ It is against this background of evangelical life that his economic and political views are to be understood. For many of the faithful of one-sided convictions those views are shocking. One example : his marked distrust, hostility even, for the dictators of Latin America scandalises us. Yet who amongst us, thinking only of Pinochet saving his country from Bolshevism, realises that for every dictator like him there are twenty others wholly subject to Freemasonry and capitalism and who for two centuries have crushed the peoples and persecuted the Church’s apostolic forces in this vast continent ?

“ In the difficult problems of our times, God’s candidate, like his holy predecessors Gregory XVI, Pius IX and Pius X, intended to trace the Church’s path along the straight line of the pure Gospel, as far removed from a supposedly enslaving and inhuman right as it is from a supposedly humanist and justice-loving left.

“ We therefore narrowly missed seeing that famous third way. It is the Catholic way. It is the way that a Pope Luciani (or Lorscheider) would have been capable of showing forth in his own person, then in the internal life of the Church, and finally in human society generally.

“ Its principle is to live for God, in contempt of money. Its long term work is to create religious, political and ecological institutions capable of restoring social justice and perfecting it through Christian charity without in any way yielding to the institutional violence of Masonic plutocracy on the one hand or to the insurrectional violence of socialism or communism on the other. ”


Cardinal Bergoglio
Cardinal Bergoglio in 2003

This is why in 2002, when our Father received a dossier from Argentinian friends on Cardinal Bergoglio, Archbishop of Buenos Aires, he recognised in this prelate, hitherto unknown to him, the characteristics of the Pope of the renaissance. Accordingly he desired him as John Paul II’s successor.

Following his instructions, Brother Bruno wrote an editorial entitled : “ Gentle and Humble Anticipation : Is a New Saint Pius X Coming ? ” (He is risen !, January 2003). In it he abundantly quoted articles that presented the Archbishop of Buenos Aires as a papabile. Why ? His approach, which is “ more sober, more interior ” than John Paul II’s “ expressed the essence of the Gospel more explicitly. ”Vatican experts said that the next Pope “ will preach the Cross and return to the essence of the Gospel. It is obvious that a person like Bergoglio fully expresses this need to return to the Gospel, the need for sobriety with which the Church must face up to its fights and make plain its essential nature. ”

The editorial ended with a quotation of our Father : “ I can do no harm by telling you that I have in mind Cardinal Bergoglio, and that already I am praying for him. ”

Such being the case, let it not be said that the CCR is renouncing its fifty year long fight, when in fact it is seeing its outcome, recognising in Francis the Pope capable of snatching the Church from apostasy and our nations from antichristic ideologies.


Nevertheless an important difference remains between Pope Francis and John Paul I. The latter was filled with the revelation that Sr. Lucy of Fatima made to him on July 11, 1977, as he admitted to Dom Germano Pattaro, a Venetian theologian whom he had asked to come to Rome to be his advisor : “ It is something that has troubled me this whole year. It has robbed me of my spiritual peace and tranquillity. Ever since that pilgrimage, I have never forgotten Fatima [...]. It was unthinkable, and yet Sister Lucy’s prediction has turned out to be true. Here I am. I am Pope [...]. If I live, I shall return to Fatima to consecrate the world and particularly the peoples of Russia to the Blessed Virgin, in accordance with the instructions She gave to Sister Lucy. ”

We find no equivalent statement made by Pope Francis who, on the contrary, seems to ignore everything about the Message of Fatima. Despite his great Marian devotion, he does not seem to have grasped the absolutely unique place of the Immaculate Conception in the divine orthodromy and the importance of the devotion that God wants us to have for Her.

“ In order to save the souls of the poor sinners, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, ” Our Lady declared on June 13 and July 13, 1917. It is the refusal of the Church, and in particular of the Pope, to submit to this divine will that has since brought about all the scourges from which our time suffers, from world wars to famines, accompanied by this consumption of the Church, now half in ruins.

One does not need to be a prophet to announce that as long as Pope Francis has not satisfied these demands, he will come up against great difficulties that he will be unable to overcome by his own strength or even his charisma.

While our Father was anticipating the return of John Paul I, as we have just seen, he thus envisaged that he would have much to suffer.

For example, on January 26, 1997, when commenting on the homily of St. Leo for the feast of the Chair of St. Peter : “ I am very impressed by this extraordinary miracle [St. Peter walking on the waters] because it is as if I see him. With faith, St. Peter steps out of the boat and walks on the water and he becomes frightened. At the very moment when he began to fear, he sunk and Christ stretched out His hand to withdraw him from the depths. What a lesson ! What Peter did is the figure of what the Pope does from generation to generation. He walks on the waters of all these errors, of all these disorders ; he goes through forests, the wild beasts of which are false religions, false political parties, all the unleashed powers. He is there with the strength of Christ Who, holds his hand, assuring him the victory.

“ I reread these sentences and I said to myself : patience, courage ; barring a miracle, I do not think that John Paul II will convert. He is too old, he staked too much on things that are contrary to faith, hope and charity. In this frenzy of celebrations and trips that he unceasingly undertakes, he has but one idea : to head this great celebration of the year 2000. How can you expect him to take stock of his youth and see that he yielded to pride of novelty ever since his childhood ? I think, however, that since the papacy cannot die out, the successor will be this Pope for whom we are praying in advance.

“ This Pope who is now going to come back to Rome, will find all the wild beast unleashed there, for we will not be able to go back on this Council, on these errors spread everywhere throughout the clergy without becoming the target, the martyr of all these opposing powers. We will therefore need a Pope who is willing to be crucified as St. Peter was. This sermon of St. Leo shows us, however, that he will be able to dominate the evil powers. For us, we can breathe again ! What joy, what elation ! We, who are treated as outcasts, as things accursed, suddenly we find ourselves not the best, but simply the collaborators of this Pope who will be persecuted, his companions in the fight. ”

In his homily of December 31, 2001, our Father exulted “ at the thought of serving a martyr Pope, of taking up arms with Sister Lucy of Fatima who is so persecuted. The Virgin Mary will be our salvation. ”

This premonition of a Pope of the renaissance, but who will still have much to suffer is akin to the two prophetic visions of little Jacinta of Fatima, that have not yet been fulfilled. The first one shows us the Holy Father suffering : “ I do not know how, but I saw the Holy Father in a very big house, kneeling by a table, with his head in his hands and weeping. Outside, there were many people and some of them were throwing stones, others were cursing him and using bad language against him. Poor Holy Father ! We must pray very hard for him ! ”

In the second vision, the Holy Father is praying – at long last – to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, but after such punishments ! “ Can’t you see all those highways and roads and fields full of dead people with their blood pouring out, and others who are crying with hunger and have nothing to eat ? And the Holy Father in a church praying before the Immaculate Heart of Mary ? And so many people praying with him ? ”


We must also recall the surprising dream that St. John Bosco had in 1873, which our Father commented on at length in The Catholic Counter-Reformation of December 1993. Although very impenetrable upon first reading, it becomes crystal-clear when one understands that it represents the Church of Vatican II, a victim of the “ diabolical disorientation. ”

“ It was during a dark night; people could no longer tell the path to take to their homes. When there appeared in the sky a splendid light that lit the footsteps of the travellers as though it were high noon.” This light is “ a false light of a diabolical Pentecost, fascinating all those in the world who were not firmly attached to the Rock of Peter and founded on the Faith. It was the worst of Satan’s illusions... Thereafter, the rest is perfectly understandable. ”

“ Then were to be seen a crowd of men, women, children, old men, monks, nuns and priests, and at their head the Sovereign Pontiff, leaving the Vatican and forming in procession. ” Fr. de Nantes explained : “ This departure from the Vatican signified an estrangement, a disgust and a flight from the whole centuries old ecclesiastical order in its dogmas, rites, sacraments, customs and other traditions. All the people, this immense crowd, followed the Pope. ”

Then a violent storm broke “ noticeably overshadowing that light. ” The procession crossed “ a small square that was strewn with dead and wounded. ” Its ranks “ thinned out considerably. ”

Then came the time of the punishment of this terrible wandering : “ Having walked for a period corresponding to two hundred sunrises, they all noticed that they were no longer in Rome. Fear seized hold of their minds and each one pressed round the Pope in order to protect his person and to help him in his troubles. At that moment [of maximum anguish], two angels could be seen presenting the Pope with a standard and saying to him : ‘ Receive this red banner from Him Who fights and scatters the most powerful armies of the earth. Your enemies have fled and your sons are imploring you with sighs and tears to return. ’ Raising one’s eyes to the standard, one could read written on one side : ‘ Regina sine labe concepta, ’ Queen conceived without sin, and on the other side : ‘ Auxilium christianorum, ’ Help of Christians. ”

Our Father points out that at this moment, the Pope is exhausted, but has not yet reached the end of the road to ruin that continues to disappear even further, even deeper into darkness and quagmires. Because of so many dead, pitiful wounded, and wanderers, but also because of his sons and his close assessors more and more discountenanced, he is overcome by the necessity of returning to where he came from.

“ The Pontiff took the standard with joy, but seeing the small number of those who had stayed with him, he became very sad. ” This makes us think of Pope Francis pointing out that the parable of the Lost Sheep has to be modified today : the Shepherd does not have to leave the ninety-nine sheep and go to look for the lost one, but he must abandon the one sheep remaining in the fold to go find the other ninety-nine !

Then at the name of the Immaculate, the Angels give wise advice to the Pontiff, a programme of Catholic renaissance.

“ The two angels added : ‘ Go quickly to comfort your sons. Write to your Brothers scattered throughout the whole world, that a reform of morals is necessary. It can only be achieved by distributing to the peoples the bread of the divine Word. Catechise the children. Preach detachment from earthly things. The time has come, the two angels conclude, when the poor will take the Gospel to the peoples. The Levites will be taken from among those who wield the axe, the spade and the hammer, so that the words of David might be fulfilled : ‘ I have raised up the poor man from the dust of the earth to place him on the throne of the princes of his people.

“ Having heard that, the Pope began to move forward, and the ranks of those in the procession swelled. When he entered the holy City, he began to weep over the desolation of its inhabitants, many of whom were no more. Then entering St. Peter’s, he intoned the Te Deum, which was taken up by a choir of angels singing Gloria in excelsis Deo, et in terra pax hominibus bonæ voluntatis. The singing ended, the darkness completely vanished and a brilliant sun began to shine. The towns, villages and countryside saw their populations much diminished. The earth seemed to preserve the trace of a storm and of rainfall or hail, and people were going up to one another and saying : ‘ Yes, truly, there is a God in Israel. ’ ”

We can have no doubt about this victory obtained by the mediation and the power of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Accordingly we must never grow weary of praying for the Holy Father, all the more so because he is kind, pious, poor, and has true devotion to the Blessed Virgin.

Let him obey the demands of Our Lady ; then, as our Father stated in 2001 : “ The resurrection of the Church will not be proportionate to what went before. It will take place when God so wills, even if everything points to the contrary. (...) It will be tremendous. It will come about naturally, in a rapid, flexible and simplicity manner. ”