|
Pope
St. Pius X described Modernism as the synthesis of all heresies.
From the beginning of this century, it grew and infected many
of the clergy and laity. It teaches that our knowledge of
God cannot be certain and that faith comes out of man's need
of a God. From these principles, Modernism sets out to
destroy dogmas and divine revelation. It seeks to reduce Christ
to mere human dimensions, and makes divine inspiration a common
gift to all of mankind. This modernism, the coming together
of all heresies, is now the “official theology of Vatican
II.”
PART
ONE: THE APPARENT VICTORY OF MODERNISM EXPOSED
AND DENOUNCED BY ST. PIUS X
St. Pius
X, in his encyclical Pascendi (1907) denounced those
modernist "partisans of error" who concealed themselves
"in the very womb and heart of the Church" insidiously
spreading destruction "from within the Church itself...So
that the danger today lies in the very heart and veins of
the Church."
This
same saint added the pain of excommunication against anyone
contradicting the encyclical Pascendi or the decree
Lamentabili, which exposed and condemned Modernism.
He also
insisted that all bishops and religious superiors be on their
guard against modernist infiltration, to carefully screen
those chosen as seminary professors, as well as prospective
seminarians and priests, saying: "If any [priest] be
found tainted with modernist errors...let them be absolutely
forbidden from teaching anything whatsoever. Also any seminarian
in any way even suspected of attachment to these condemned
modernist novelties and doctrines, must be refused all access
to Holy Orders" (Motu
Proprio, November 18, 1907).
Pope
St. Pius X knew that the modernists sought out followers in
seminaries and religious houses, where the future of the Church
was formed. In order to do this, they secretly organized themselves
into hidden sects.
DENOUNCED
BY THE GREAT THEOLOGIAN FR. GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, O.P.
In 1946,
Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange wrote a brilliant article entitled:
"Where is the New Theology Leading
Us To?" To Modernism, he replied. He then proceeded
to denounce this work of doctrinal corruption, saying that:
"Typed sheets have been distributed among the clergy,
seminarians and Catholic intellectuals, containing strange
doctrinal assertions and negations." Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange
quoted, at length, many parts of those secret sheets - a preview
of all the heretical novelties that would emerge in this post-Vatican
II era. One example will be sufficient: "A general convergence
of all religions to a universal Christ, which will satisfy
them all. This seems to me to be the only possible imaginable
conversion for a Religion of the future." This is the
very essence of today's ecumenism, which seeks to bring together
all religions, in a Christ separated from His Mystical Body,
the Catholic Church.
THE
CONFIRMATION
Confirmation
of this treachery comes to us today, from the very lips of
those representing this New Theology. A mouthpiece of theirs
is the journal Communio and in an article of November-December,
1990, the Jesuit Fr. Peter Henrici (born 1928) tells us that:
a)
In Jesuit seminaries, contrary to papal instructions, the
doctrine, method and principles of St. Thomas Aquinas were
openly scorned and held in contempt. Henrici assures us that
"the official scholastic studies of St. Thomas were merely
thumbed through."
b)
Behind that facade of official studies, modernist texts and
tracts were secretly circulated to the most brilliant and
promising seminarians. Those same modernist concepts, secretly
passed around, would later reappear as the New Theology. Those
who showed interest and promise in theology, would be given
the modernist Fr. Henri de Lubac's book: The Supernatural
- the most forbidden of forbidden books! Then they would receive
another of his books, Corpus Mysticum. This was done
to inculcate them with the principle that identical theological
terms could have different meanings with the passage of time
or when looked at in another context. Thus we say goodbye
to unchanging divine and apostolic Tradition! Goodbye to the
homogenous development of dogma! Goodbye to unchangeable truths!
Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange
was right in saying the novelty of this New Theology would
deprive the Church of its sound Tradition. Today, the ideas
and assumptions of that novelty, make up the premises of the
New Tradition, which, though it is living, is no longer coherent.
These
treacherous modernist theologians, then condemned, were later
rewarded at Vatican II. The aggiornamento (updating)
spirit of Vatican II placed the Conciliar Fathers in a position
where they had to rely upon the preparatory work done by theologians
prior to the Council. In other words, those Vatican II bishops
who succumbed to the siren song of the aggiornamento
ended up having to rely upon the works of those who had concocted
and cultivated a New Theology in direct opposition to Catholic
theology.
A great
number of these Conciliar Fathers did not know or understand
the New Theology. It had been cultivated in secrecy, in closed
circles. It was hidden behind traditional sounding terms.
The Fathers, ignorant of these facts, gave this often traditional-sounding,
New Theology a kind of ecclesiastical orthodoxy and acceptability.
A
VETERAN’S TESTIMONY
Similar
expressions of modernist triumphalism are found in the work
of Fr. Henri Bouillard, S.J. - a veteran of the New Theology.
On the occasion of the inauguration of a center known as the
Maurice Blondel Archives at the Catholic University of Louvain,
Belgium, Bouillard stresses the influence of Blondel's philosophy
on the New Theology: "Blondel's thoughts and ideas have,
in their essential theses, progressively won the day."
The orthodox teachings, brushed aside and dismissed by Blondel
are "no longer valid today."
THE
COUNCIL – VATICAN II
For Bouillard,
the most conclusive and positive proof of the modernist victory
is Vatican II, where "they abandoned the concept of looking
at the natural and supernatural orders as two superimposed
things neither having any kind of internal link with the other.
It is interesting to note that, in none of Vatican II's major
documents, will you find the use of the word, supernatural.
Bouillard's affirmation is only too true, being well documented
and easily proved by the official documents of Vatican II.
Under the influence of Modernism, it has deliberately and
studiously avoided in its most important documents (especially
those dealing with ecumenism) the use of the word, supernatural.
Thus its major documents implicitly approve naturalism, which
is the essence of Modernism. This naturalism has also proved
itself the basis of Blondel's philosophy and of De Lubac's
theology.
So, we
must ask ourselves today, what is being substantially proposed
to us as Catholics in the name of Vatican II? The answer is
that same New Theology officially condemned by Pope Pius XII.
What lies hidden beneath this billboard? Nothing else but
that same modernism condemned by Pius X and which leads to
a radical denial of the existence of divine revelation, the
divinity of Our Lord and the divine origin of the Catholic
Church.
THE
WINNERS
Still
more recently, in 30 Days (December 1991), we find
the same Fr. Henrici saying:
a)
that the New Theology condemned by Pope Pius XII in the Encyclical
Humani Generis, has now "become the official theology
of Vatican II."
b)
that the key positions in the Church are already in the hands
of the actual representatives of the New Theology, whose mouthpiece
is the journal Communio: "Nearly all of the theologians
who have been named bishops in recent years, have come up
through the Communio line. Their names form a list
of important persons destined for the top careers: the Germans,
Lehman and Kasper, the Swiss, Von Schonborn and Corecco; the
Italian, Scola; the Belgian, Leonard and the Brazilian, Romer.”
The Jesuit professor at the Gregorian University, Peter Henrici,
slyly laments: "The founding members, Balthasar, De Lubac
and Ratzinger, have all become cardinals. Many of the second
generation have been chosen as bishops."
He also
adds such important names as that of "the Dominican theologian
in the Papal residence, Georges Cottier; also Jean Duschesne,
press agent for Cardinal Lustiger; the Hegelian André
Léonard, Bishop of Namur" who has charge of St.
Paul's Seminary, the place where Cardinal Lustiger sends his
seminarians. According to 30 Days: "These are
the ones (they say!) who have won."
THE
BREAK
Similar
cries of triumph and indirect confessions of treachery are
found in post-Vatican II era, Neo-modernist literature:
A book
by Fr. René Latourelle, SJ. entitled Vatican II-1962-87:
Results & Views 25 Years Later, was in fact
"produced by the Jesuit Universities in Rome." (from
the Italian magazine Avvenire). The book has 68 contributors
from 20 countries (all, but two, are Jesuits) clearly illustrating
the triumph of this New Theology and the favor lavished upon
it by Pope Paul VI. One of these contributors, Fr. Martini
SJ., says: "Though it's not quite a case of excommunications
being followed by canonizations, nevertheless some notorious
theologians who were reprimanded prior to Vatican II, later
found themselves playing a major role amidst Vatican II experts,
and thus had a great influence in the formulation of Vatican
II decrees. In 1950, some of their books were officially removed
from library shelves. After the Council, these same authors
were named cardinals (De Lubac and Danielou)."
Thus
do we see the Encyclical Humani Generis, of Pope Pius
XII, quickly being repudiated and disowned by another Pope.
Those who had always faithfully adhered to Rome's directives,
now wondered to whom they owed obedience: to the Pope of yesterday
who was in full agreement with his predecessors, or the present
Pope, who had evidently broken with the constant and traditional
direction of the Church.
More
recently, on the anniversary of De Lubac's death, the Vatican
newspaper L 'Osservatore Romano (September 1992)
devoted an entire page to Cardinal De Lubac and “the great
theses of a precursor of Vatican II.” In it we read: "Our
thoughts turn to Blondel, Gilson, Mounier, Maritain, De Lubac,
Chenv and many others, who prepared the philosophical and
theological positions which later emerged in many themes of
Vatican II."
Therefore,
we must admit that the New Theology, officially condemned
by Pope Pius XII, as being nothing but a heap of "false
opinions, which threaten to overthrow the very foundations
of Catholic doctrine," has now become "the official
theology of Vatican II" (Fr. Henrici).
This
open Neo-modernist war against the Church is a grave reality,
especially since it is waged by persons occupying such high
positions in the Church. The reason why we are exposing the
current situation in such detail is to shake people out of
their indifference or numbness, and to put them on their guard
against this very real danger threatening their souls.
It is
nothing less than that long-standing "often passive,
but nevertheless real resistance" of the bishops themselves,
which paved the way for the present crisis in the Church,
a crisis that is simply the triumph of Modernism in the Catholic
Church. Therefore, it is necessary to know a little more about
those who think they have won and just what it is that they
are after. They think that they have won the day simply because
they do not believe in the words of Jesus Christ "And
I say to thee: that thou art Peter and upon this rock I will
build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against
it! (Matt 16:18)"
PART
2: TRUE AND FALSE RESTORATION
(Translator’s
note)
MAGISTERIUM:
The Church’s divinely appointed authority to infallibly
teach the truths of Religion, “Going therefore, teach ye all
nations…teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have
commanded you. (Matt. 28:19-20)”
MAGISTERIUM
SCORNED
“The
Church insists that its future priests be formed in the philosophical
disciplines 'according to the method, doctrine and principles
of the Angelic Doctor’ (St. Thomas Aquinas). The reason being
that experience over many centuries has proven (to the Church)
that the method of St. Thomas Aquinas, whether informing young
minds, or sounding the depths of the deepest truths, stands
high above all others by its singular merits; his doctrine
is in complete harmony with Divine Revelation and in perfect
accord; it is particularly useful and efficient in laying,
in all safety, the foundations of Faith, as well as in reaping,
in a sure and useful manner, the fruits of true progress.”
- Pope Pius XII, Humani generis
Those
who think themselves to be “winners” are those neo-modernist
faithful (if we can use this expression) to the line of the
founding fathers of the “New Theology,” and particularly to
the (tortuous, involved and obscure) line drawn by the Jesuit
Henri de Lubac and that of the ex-Jesuit Hans Urs von Balthasar.
"The representatives of the New Theology are celebrated
as if they constituted the cornerstone of the Church"
rightly recorded the famous thinker and writer Dom Jules Meinvielle.
But before
presenting you with these "holy fathers" of the
post-Conciliar Catholic world, it would be most opportune
and useful to briefly illustrate the very essence of the "new
theology."
THE
SIMPLE PRINCIPLE OF A COMPLEX HERESY
The German
priest and theologian Johannes Dörmann, in his best book
The Strange Theology of John Paul II and the Spirit
of Assisi writes:
"The
'New Theology,' although many-sided and varied, is really
quite simple in its principle, and that is why its multiple
forms can be grouped together under the same title. Its different
forms ALL HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: THEIR STUDIED REJECTION
OF TRADITIONAL THEOLOGY. (p.55)"
The author
then provides us with a concise and effective explanation
of what is meant by the "rejection of Traditional theology,"
referring to the last Council which deemed it necessary to
abandon the Church's scholastic language or terminology for
"pastoral" motives:
"The
chief theologians (who were actually directing the Council)
saw very clearly that in this question of scholastic language,
both theology as well as the Faith itself were at stake. For
scholastic terminology was indissolubly linked to scholastic
philosophy which itself is linked to scholastic theology which
is, in its turn, closely knit to the Dogmatic Tradition of
the Church." (p.52)
And consequently,
this abandoning of scholastic language would end up, in the
last analysis, in saying farewell to the Divine and Apostolic
Tradition so faithfully kept and guarded by the Church.
"This
rejection or abandonment of the 'language of the Scholastic
school' by the Council Fathers (Dörmann writes) constituted
for them (those theologians directing the Council) the SINE
QUA NON or indispensable condition which would assure
a complete rupture from traditional dogmatic teachings, in
order to set the 'New Theology' in place after having ceased
using 'the previous traditional theology' and discarding it
once and for all. (p.53)"
SHEER
UTOPIANISM
And just
what was the motivation of this dumping of Traditional theology?
...They were motivated by "this simple and seductive
idea: a 'New Theology' consonant with modern, scientific characteristics,
as well as with the modern image of the world and history.
(p.55)"
In other
words they were motivated by the old and constantly recurring
Utopia of the Church being reconciled with the modern world,
that is with modern philosophical thought, and with which
Pope Pius IX (Syllabus, Proposition 80) declared that
the Church cannot and must not reconcile itself, seeing its
essentially anti-Christian character and outlook:
"(Modern)
men are, in general, strangers to truth and supernatural benefits
and graces, thinking as they do to be able to satisfy themselves
exclusively by human reason and in the natural order of things
as they (vainly) expect to reach in them their own perfection
as together with their own happiness" (Vatican I, preparatory
outline of Catholic Doctrine).
"For
those partisans of the 'new theology' (Dörmann continues),
the slogan, 'aggiornamento' simply meant a resolute opening-up
on the part of the Church to modern thought (which is totally
alien to Truth as well as supernatural treasures and values)
in order to end up with a completely new and different theology
from which would be born a new secularized Church, adapted
to its modern time. (p.54)"
This
is nothing but modernist Utopianism. "Where is the new
theology taking us? It is taking us in a straight line to
modernism," wrote Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange O.P. in 1946.
And in
fact, digging a little more deeply into the matter, we find
beneath the simple principle of the new theology, that same
perversion of the notion of truth which serves as the very
foundation of modernism: "Truth is no more unchangeable
than man himself, for it evolves with him, in him and by him.
(Pope Saint Pius X, in his Decree Lamentabili, condemned
proposition #58)"
From
all this, Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange O.P. who, laying aside all
pretense at prophesying, simply came to these logical conclusions
in 1946 (16 years BEFORE Vatican II): "And where is this
New Theology headed with its new masters from whom they seek
to draw their inspiration? Where is it heading if not for
the road to skepticism, whims and heresy"? ("La
nouvelle theologie. Ou va-t-elle?" In Angelicum
#23-1946, p.136)
A
BLAMEWORTHY UTOPIA
This
attempt to reconcile the Church with the "modern world"
cannot be considered an innocent utopia. The Magisterium of
the Roman Pontiffs, has, over and over again, blocked the
way to such moves, particularly Popes Gregory XVI (Mirari
Vos, 1832), Pius IX (Syllabus, 1864), Saint Pius
X (Pascendi; 1907) and, on the eve of the last Council,
Pius XII (Humani Generis, 1950).
In this
last encyclical, scorned, disavowed and buried by those very
same persona whom it condemned, Pius XII, illustrating the
(theological) climate preceding the Council, points out "with
anxiety" and clarity the dangers of the "New Theology"
which, seeking its basis outside the enduring philosophy,
endangers the entire structure of Catholic Dogma. Particularly
noteworthy is the fact that Pope Pius XII does not hesitate
one moment to underline in red the scorn heaped upon the Magisterium,
an underlying scorn borne out by its attitude:
29.
But reason can perform these functions safely and well, only
when properly trained, that is, when imbued with that sound
philosophy which has long been, as it were, a patrimony handed
down by earlier Christian ages, and which moreover possesses
an authority of even higher order, since the teaching authority
of the Church, in the light of Divine Revelation itself,
has weighed its fundamental tenets, which have been elaborated
and defined little by little by men of great genius. For this
philosophy, acknowledged and accepted by the Church, safeguards
the genuine validity of human knowledge, the unshakable metaphysical
principles of sufficient reason, causality and finality, and
finally the mind's ability to attain certain and unchangeable
truth.
30.
Of course this philosophy deals with much that neither directly
nor indirectly touches faith or morals, and which consequently
the Church leaves to the free discussion of experts. But
this does not hold for many other things, especially those
principles and fundamental tenets to which we have
just referred (validity of human knowledge, the unshakable
metaphysical principles, etc...). But never may we overthrow
it, or contaminate it with false principles, or regard it
as a great, but obsolete, relic. For truth and its philosophic
expression cannot change from day to day, least of all where
there is question of self-evident principles of the human
mind or of those propositions which are supported by the wisdom
of the ages and by Divine Revelation.
32.
How deplorable it is then that this philosophy, received
and honored by the Church, is scorned by some who
today call it outmoded in form and rationalistic, as they
say, in its method of thought. While scorning our philosophy,
they extol other philosophies of all kinds, ancient and modern,
oriental and occidental, by which they seem to imply that
any kind of philosophy or theory, with a few additions and
corrections if need be, can be reconciled with Catholic dogma.
No Catholic can doubt how false this is, especially where
there is question of those fictitious theories they call immanentism,
or idealism, or materialism, whether historic or dialectic,
or even existentialism, whether atheistic or simply the type
that denies the validity of the reason in the field of metaphysics.
34.
It would indeed be unnecessary to deplore these aberrations
from the truth, if all even in the field of philosophy,
directed their attention with the proper reverence to the
teaching authority of the Church, which by divine institution
has the mission not only to guard and interpret the deposit
of divinely revealed truth, but also to keep watch over
the philosophical sciences themselves, in order that
Catholic Dogmas may suffer no harm because of erroneous opinions."
Thus
do we see confirmed that which we have been repeating for
years: we have irrefutable as well as unmistakable proof that
although they are members of the Catholic Hierarchy, the neo-modernists
have disobeyed and continue to disobey the constant and therefore
infallible Magisterium of the Catholic Church and their own
"obedience" which they, in turn, seek to impose
in their style of new Church, results in the moral obligation
of the true and faithful Catholics to disobey the false orders
of their new-style Church.
|
|
|
THE
BREAK- A number of the exponents of the "New
Theology" who are mentioned in this article.
(Top
to bottom) Maurice Blondel, Father Alfred Loisy,
Cardinal Henri de Lubac, Cardinal Ratzinger
|
TRUE
AND FALSE "RESTORATION"
From
what we have just seen, it logically follows that true
restoration can only come by traveling along in a reverse
direction from the one which led to the rupture or breaking
away from the Doctrinal Tradition of the Church: a return
to constant and durable philosophy, and therefore to
Scholastic Theology, therefore to the Dogmatic tradition
of the Church in faithful obedience to the constant
directives and teachings of the Magisterium of all the
Popes. Those neo-modernists following the modern “line”
of de Lubac and of von Balthasar are now posing as “moderates
and even as “restorers,” but they categorically refuse
to repudiate or renounce their “New Theology” from which
– whether they like it or not - arose this crisis which
today paralyses the life of the Church. “Our line” (the
one we follow) - declared, sure of himself, Fr. Henrici
S.J. to (the review) 30 DAYS (December 1991)
– “is the one of the extreme centre. No excessive attention
(sic!) to the Magisterium, nor CONTENTION. No
right, nor left. Attachment to tradition (which in the
language or “Newspeak” of de Lubac and of the “new”
theologians, is not - as we will see - the Dogmatic
tradition of the Church) in the line of the new theology
of Lyon (seat of de Lubac as well as that of the other
“founding fathers” (of the new theology), which underscored
the non-opposition (i.e. identification) between nature
and supernature, between faith and culture, and which
has become the official theology of Vatican II.”
“That
same ‘New Theology’ Pope Pius XII officially condemned
in his Encyclical Humani Generis as simply being
a whole heap of “false opinions threatening to lay
waste the very foundations of Catholic Doctrine!”
It is, therefore, even more imperative to bring to light
just what is behind the “moderation” of these neo-modernists
of the “extreme centre,” yes, but still modernists just
the same.
Hirpinus
Translated from Courrier de Rome, March 1993
|
Courtesy of the Angelus
Press, Kansas City, MO 64109
translated from the Italian
Fr. Du Chalard
Via Madonna degli Angeli, 14
Italia 00049 Velletri (Roma))
|
