The Catholic Church and the Second Vatican Council Conference given by Fr. Franz Schmidberger, SSPX, in Dublin, Ireland, in January, 1989 Dear Reverend Father, my dear friends, I think that the most important part of my conference is already over. The most important part of the conference was the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which I celebrated with you and which summarises the whole teaching of the Church and demonstrates a hierarchy descending from heaven, giving us all graces because the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass continues the Cross of Our Lord among us. I think that in spite of this, it would be quite useful if I give you some guidelines about what is happening in the Church in our day. It would be necessary, to really understand things, to go back to the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, to the time of Humanism and Renaissance. Then to look at the time of the Protestant Reformation, then to go forward to see the time of liberalism, extending its kingdom everywhere, in the spirits, in society - and, going on, to see the revolution of Marxism and the disaster it has brought to the world. The Church after 1945 But I want to begin with and have a look at the conditions of the Church after World War II. There was an enormous destruction, not only materially, but also morally, in this war. After the war there was a tremendous reconstruction but more so, an exterior reconstruction. We find ourselves under the pontificate of Pope Pius XII and it seems that things are in good shape. The Church is flourishing and there are a lot of conversions, especially in Protestant countries. But it must be said that in other countries, there is a certain stagnation in the frequency of the offices. The number of vocations are falling and there are lapses in the clergy: priests and even bishops are troubled and do not know what direction to take. They do not know how to react to the problems of the world, which is more and more involved in an enormous progress, in technology and natural sciences. What should have been the true solution amidst such problems, in such a situation? It should have consisted of making an enormous and very urgent appeal to the Catholics, to the faithful, to the clergy, to rediscover the sources of sanctity, to refuel the institutions Our Blessed Lord had established in His spilt Blood, to give them new life. These wonderful institutions: the family, Catholic marriage, Catholic schools, the Catholic state, monasteries, seminaries, the Catholic priesthood. To strengthen the apostolic spirit in the souls and eventually find out if the mass media could not be utilized in spreading the kingdom of Our Lord, in announcing His gospel. Yet, the authorities in the Church have very often taken the opposite way. They began to question their whole mission and their own identity. They had a manner of self-criticism, of questioning themselves. They doubted the divine structure and essence of the Church and they said that in the midst of a completely secularised world, the Church cannot just maintain its position. The Church also must change. Prophets of gloom A characteristic of this attitude are the words of Hans Urs van Balthasar, a former Jesuit Father, from Switzerland, who died last year. He said in the beginning of the 1950’s, that “The ‘razing of the bastions…’ was in fact an urgent duty”. What are these bastions? They are: the social bodies in the Catholic culture, a whole Catholic civilization. They comprise the family, marriage, especially the system of Catholic education and the Catholic state. "These bastions", he says, "must be dismantled". That means they must be destroyed. Cardinal Ratzinger in his book, ‘Theological Principles’ edited in 1982, in Rome, refers to this word of Urs van Balthasar saying that “The ‘razing of the bastions…’ was in fact an urgent duty”. The modern exegesis became more and more inspired especially by Bultman, the Protestant theologian, a complete rationalist and scepticist, who rejects whole parts of the holy gospel. His influence reached the minds of the priests, especially the future priests, the candidates, in the seminaries. Karl Rahner, the German Jesuit, began to speak about the anonymous Christian, saying that everybody is Christian and many understand by this, that everybody is therefore, more or less, automatically saved. A Reform of the Church They began to speak about the reform of the Church but did not mean by this, the reform of the hearts and the spirits, a true interior conversion; but they meant by this, the changes in the structure of the Church, laid down by Our Divine Saviour and Founder - so, a true revolution. Pope John XXIII then gave the word of order with his ‘Aggiornamento’. "We must update the Church", he says, "to the new living conditions in the modern world, making us acceptable to modern man." And you know who this modern man is? He is an atheistic man. He is a man that does not accept any authority, any law; he wants to be free; he is a selfish man, a man who is living by sensuality, not by faith, not by his spiritual capacities and faculties. He is a materialistic man. But the Pope thought that the Church simply needs to be at the service of this modern man and he said that there exist prophets of gloom and that he does not agree with them. We must take a much more positive, optimistic standpoint. Opening Speech of Vatican II Let me just read what he said in his homily at the opening of the Council, on October 11th, 1962: "In the daily exercise of our pastoral office, we sometimes have to listen, much to our regret, to voices of persons who, though burning with zeal, are not endowed with too much sense of discretion or measure. In these modern times they can see nothing but prevarication and ruin. They say that our era, in comparison with past eras, is getting worse, and they behave as though they had learned nothing from history, which is, none the less, the teacher of life. They behave as though at the time of former Councils everything was a full triumph for the Christian idea and life and for proper religious liberty. We feel we must disagree with those prophets of gloom, who are always forecasting disaster, as though the end of the world were at hand." Two Modern Errors He says, "We must disagree with those prophets of gloom". It is clear that this time before the Council and during the Council itself was characterised by two enormous errors, which had been already indicated and denounced by Donoso Cortes, the Spanish philosopher in the last century. He said: "There is one error concerning God and one error concerning man". One error concerning God: God is not absolute! It is the rejection of His Sovereignty, of His Majesty, of His unchangeable substance, of His presence in the world and of His appearance in human history, in the life of the individuals and people. They see God much more in the light of the deistic philosophers, who say that God created the world but that then He retired and is sitting behind the clouds, behind the sky, doing nothing about the world, leaving the world to itself. The second error, concerning man, is as dangerous as the first. It says that man is born without original sin, ‘immaculate’; that our souls have not been wounded, not spoiled by evil, not touched by it, that we are all good, and so, man does not need redemption. He just needs, perhaps, some education. But it means that man does not need the Cross of Our Lord, that the character of expiation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is quite fruitless and is not needed. It means that man does need penance, does not need to deny himself, to practice mortification, to die to the old Adam in him; that the grace of God is not necessary. So these people arrive at the axiom of Rousseau, saying that we just have to return to ‘pure nature’ and all problems will be resolved and everything will be grand. This means, now, in education that there is no principle of authority; that there can be no punishment; that, the task, the mission, the duty of a teacher and of an educator is merely to develop the good ground in the children and not to restrain bad tendencies and passions because they do not exist. This means in human society that we have to orientate ourselves towards a mission of passivism, believing enemies do not exist, that there is no evil in the world, simply some political, diplomatic, psychological misunderstandings which can be resolved with patience. This means that, generally, people dream about an unlimited progress by technique, by natural sciences, by psychological and other human sciences. They dream about unlimited salvation for everybody. They dream about paradise on this earth. Vatican II In the midst of this general situation, of this illusion, was born the Second Vatican Council, which I will describe as the biggest disaster of this century, if not of the whole history of the Church; and at its very beginning, it certainly committed three enormous sins. The first sin is that the Council has not really defined any Catholic truth, while at the same time not rejecting the opposite errors. The second sin of this Council was that it has adopted ambiguous notions, ambiguous statements or sentences which are absolutely contrary to one another. I will give you examples of this, later on. The third mortal sin of this Council was that it has established some doctrines which are very close to heresy. Now let me show you, taking five decrees of this Council, how these accusations can be verified within the texts themselves. We will have a look at the Decree about ecumenism, ‘Unitatis Redintegratio’; about the Church itself, ‘Lumen Gentium’; about non-Christian religions, ‘Nostra Aetate’; about religious liberty, ‘Dignitatis Humanae’; and about the Church in the modern world, ‘Gaudium et Spes’. My dear friends, I am very well aware that this conference will ask of you a great spiritual and intellectual effort, in order to follow the different developments but I think it is necessary to expose the roots of these errors, which have led to all the abuses and the decline after the Council and to the whole destruction of the Church. 1 - Decree on Ecumenism: ‘Unitatis Redintegratio’ So let us first take a look at the Decree on Ecumenism. For every Catholic, it is clear that there is an inseparable union between God, Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church. In fact, the Father sent His Son, who took a human nature for the work of Redemption, and this Son, this incarnate God, founded a visible Church, of which He Himself is the Head. He created one Church and since Our Lord is absolute and unique, since He is really God, the only true God, there is also only one Church, which is absolute and unique, as her Founder and Master is. "One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all", says St. Paul in his epistle to the Ephesians (4:5). This Church is the sign among the nations; she is the temple of the living God; she is the spouse of the slaughtered Lamb, the new Jerusalem which has descended to this earth. The Church is truly the Emmanuel, that is to say, God among us, God with us, the divine nature amidst the human nature. She is really the Mystical Body of Our Lord and so, she is a divine institution, since Our Lord is God and so all He says and does is divine and all that He has founded is established as a divine foundation. Thus, the Church is assisted by God in her life, in her teaching, in her worship, in her government and she has not the mission to involve herself with other religions for a better social world, for progress on this earth, for better culture or whatsoever. The mission of the Church is described by the words of Our Lord just before His Ascension: "Go ye into the whole world and preach the gospel to every creature, to all nations, make every man a disciple, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and baptise them. He that believeth shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned." (Mt. 28: 19-20, Mk 15-16) The Decree on Ecumenism of the Second Vatican Council gives us a very different understanding of the Church, of her divine mission and of her relations with the other religions. First of all it speaks of different Churches. My dear friends, that is already an expression which is very close to heresy. It is clear that already before the Council, the idea of different churches existed. But what was meant by this expression? It meant the different local churches around the bishop and his clergy: viz. the church of Paris, or the church of Dublin, or the church of Westminster, or the church of Cologne, or the church of Rome: the bishop with his clergy, surrounded by his flock. But this notion ‘Churches’ in the plural, was never used and applied to other denominations. The Second Vatican Council endorses the new meaning of this expression saying: "It follows that these separated Churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects already mentioned, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as a means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church." (No. 3) No salvation outside the Church Ladies and Gentleman, it is clear that followers of other religions can be saved under certain conditions. That is to say, if they are in invincible error. If they are trying to the best of their abilities, God will give them actual graces and if they are faithful to these graces and work with these graces, God will finally give them sanctifying grace and so, they might be saved. But they are always saved as individuals. Although they are saved in the other religions, they are never saved by the other religions. It is not possible that errors should lead to the kingdom of truth. It is not possible that God, having descended to this earth, having become incarnate and having appeared among us, having founded one Church which continues Himself, which represents Himself, which is His Church, His spouse, that anybody can be saved by false religions not founded by Him. Because He says about Himself: "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. Nobody comes to the Father but by Me." This applies also to His Church. These false religions were not founded by Him but rather by men and very often have been inspired by the devil. So, if one can be saved eventually as a member of another religion, or in another religion he will always be saved by the Catholic Church, by the Cross of Our Lord, by His sacrifice and by His prayers. So, he is not saved by other religion but in spite of the other religion. So, this statement that the Holy Ghost has used these other religions and denominations as a ‘means of salvation’ is almost heretical and I think it is one of the worst statements from the Council, absolutely contrary to the teaching of the Church to the present day. It is absolutely contrary to what was previously taught, to what the Holy Scripture says, to what the Fathers of the Church, the theologians, the Councils and the Popes have always said. Absolutely contrary. Ecumenical Practices Once it is established that these other religions also have a significance, an importance towards salvation, it is clear that Catholics are then invited to work together with these other religions, to collaborate with them, to eventually pray together with their members. This is exactly what the Council says: "They (the faithful and followers of other denominations) also come together for common prayer where this is permitted." (No. 4) A little further on it says: "In certain special circumstances, such as in prayer services ‘for unity’ and during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable, that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren. Such prayers in common are certainly a very effective means of petitioning for the grace of unity, and they are a genuine expression of the ties which even now bind Catholics to their separated brethren." (No.8) What must we say about those prayers? First of all it is clear that the prayers of members of other religions can be agreeable to God, according to their interior disposition. But it is sure that the prayers of other religions, as other religions, are never agreeable to God. It is not possible because there is only one Mediator. Our Lord is "semper vivens ad interpellandum pro nobis": He is always living and pleading the cause of His Church and His elects, says St. Paul. (Heb. 7:25) So, the prayers of these other religions, as religions, are fruitless. They have no efficacy and so, it is harmful to the fruitful to join these other religions in common prayer services. It is harmful because, there, the prayer is useless and this brings a lot of confusion and in practice, an enormous number of abuses will flow forth from this custom; it means finally to put all religions on the same level. It is very common nowadays to see Catholics go to receive the Protestant meal and to see the Protestants come to receive the Catholic Communion. It is common to hear of inter-celebrations, during which the Catholic priest pronounces the words of the Consecration over the bread and the Protestant pastor over the wine. Things like this are the final result of these texts of the Council. Who is to blame? It is very astonishing to see the Council putting the blame, for the separation, for the divisions among Christians, only on Catholic shoulders. It is very clear, my dear friends, that Catholics do not always live according to the commandments of God, that they do not always live according to their baptismal promises, that they are not always living according to the Creed they profess. But it is wrong to blame them for the divisions and the separations. In fact, the fault is on the side of those who have separated themselves from the See of Peter, from the sacrifice of our altars, from the Catholic priesthood. This is a very important point. These people are always confusing the objective and the subjective order; confusing the other religion or religions with the individual members; the knowledge of the truth (Catholic Dogma) with the realisation of this truth (morality and discipline). They say that in other religions you find very kind people engaged in social work, very friendly and smiling. Well, that might be. What follows from this? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. It is also true that in the Catholic Church, you find Catholics who are not taking very seriously their belief and do not appreciate it as they should. What flows forth from this? That they are bad Catholics. That is all. No aspersion on the Catholic faith or on the Catholic Church. Absolutely none. Now, I will give you an example showing that there are statements and phrases, in the Council documents, which are quite contrary to one another. Here are two statements which follow one another: 1) "The manner and order in which Catholic belief is expressed, should in no way become an obstacle to dialogue with our brethren." 2) "It is, of course, essential that doctrine be clearly presented in its entirety." (No. 11) If we take the first sentence, it removes all obstacles for any dialogue. What are these obstacles for dialogue? All that Protestants reject. What do they reject? The priestly character, the supremacy of Peter, the sacrificial character of the Mass, transubstantiation, the intercession of the saints, the dogmas about the Blessed Virgin Mary, purgatory, etc. So, if you want to dialogue with them, you must remove these obstacles, the Council says, you must be silent about them. We have to consider them as secondary truths which are not so important and eventually they can simply be omitted. The next sentence says: "It is, of course, essential that doctrine be clearly presented in its entirety". So, who is right? If, after the Council, a progressist reads this Council text he will say: "Well, you have it here, the Council itself says that we have to be silent about things which are embarrassing for dialogue". If a conservative man reads the text he will say: "No, the whole doctrine has to be expressed". Who is right? Both of them. Both can refer to the Council. So, you see how divisions and misunderstandings and a lot of embarrassment are already pre-programmed by these texts of the Council. 2 - Decree on the Church: ‘Lumen Gentium’ In this context, let us look at another decree of the Council, the decree ‘Lumen Gentium’, about the Church itself. There is one word in this text which is, perhaps, the most harmful word in the whole Council. In the Latin text, it is: "Ecclesia Dei subsistit in Ecclesia Catholica" (No. 8), this means ‘the Church of God subsists’ or takes its concrete form, is realised ‘in the Catholic Church’. You will say: "That’s quite right, that’s absolutely true". But that is far from the whole truth. The whole truth is much more. The whole truth is: ‘Ecclesia Dei est Ecclesia Catholica - the Church of God is the Catholic Church’. If you say that the Church of God subsists in the Catholic Church, you mean that there are two entities: the Church of God and the Catholic Church and it is quite by chance that these two entities come together. The Church of God subsists, is realised, takes its concrete form today, under the present conditions, in the Catholic Church. Perhaps in future times it could be otherwise and in fact it could also be that the Church of God is shared between different religions, nobody having the full truth but only some elements of truth. The Council itself already gives this idea. Here is the exact text: ‘This Church, constituted and organised in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in union with that successor, although many elements of sanctification and of truth can be found outside of her visible structure." (No.8) So, it is already very clear that there is a relativisation of the truth and of the Church in its very essence. St. Paul says that the people will lose the love for the truth and for that reason God will send them spirits of error by which they will be deceived (2 Thess. 2:10). This is exactly what is happening in our days. We are seeing, my dear friends, a spiritual punishment from God, a blindness of spirit as well as a hardening of hearts, especially among the leaders of the Church and the leaders of human society. 3 - Decree on Non-Christian religions: ‘Nostra Aetate’ Let us now look at non-Christian religions, which is the third decree I want to discuss with you. It is clear that these non-Christian religions have a number of natural truths. For example, to respect older people, to help those who are in misery, to be wise in your behaviour, prudent in your actions, etc. It is also clear that those religions have sometimes elements, although much hidden, which are remnants of the primitive revelation of God to Adam and Eve. Thirdly it is clear that sometimes these religions have taken elements from the Catholic Church. For example, Islam which confesses one, unique God, takes this belief from the Christian religion. But on the other hand, we must say that these non-Christian religions not only do not lead to salvation but, very often, are obstacles to finding the truth, systems of resistance to the Holy Ghost. Very often, they have such a hold on their followers, on their members, that they hinder them to leave. Take for example a Moslem. It is very difficult to convert him. He is completely held by his system, by his surroundings, by his clan, by his Islamic state. It is much easier to convert a pagan in the bush. So, these other religions not only do not lead to salvation, but very often are systems by which the father of lies holds the souls in error, far away from Jesus Christ. Hinduism What does the Council say about these other religions? I will give you some texts. "Thus, in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an unspent fruitfulness of myths and through searching philosophical enquiry. They seek release from the anguish of our condition through ascetical practices or deep meditation or a loving, trusting flight toward God." (No. 2) My dear friends, that is a definite lie because Hinduism does not recognise a unique God but many idols. You know that they worship different animals, creatures, all sorts of things, especially holy cows, which must never be slaughtered because to do this would be sacrilegious. They have great consideration for mice and rats. They consider the rats to be the vehicles of their gods. They believe in reincarnation. People owe a debt during their lifetime and if this is not discharged, they have to clear it in further incarnations in animals. So, you do not touch the rat because it might be your grandmother! There is another very serious consequence of this belief. In Hinduism, you find no mercy and pity. Why not? Because those who are in misery are clearing their ‘Karmar’, their debt and if they do not clear it in this human existence, they have to clear it afterwards. Therefore if you help them you only delay their redemption; and so, in no way do you find Christian charity among the Hindus. The most embarrassing thing you see when you visit India, is not that there are people living in poverty and misery, living and dying on the road, but it is to see how the Hindus pass by these poor creatures and are not moved at all at the sight. They find this quite normal, quite reasonable, according to their religion. Buddhism The second religion which the Council treats is Buddhism. "Buddhism in its multiple forms acknowledges the radical insufficiency of this shifting world. It teaches a path by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, can either reach a state of absolute freedom or attain supreme enlightenment by their own efforts or by higher assistance." (No. 2) First of all, it must be said that this is absolutely contrary to our Catholic religion. In our Catholic religion, we confess the absolute necessity of a Redeemer and His grace and we confess that we cannot, by ourselves, obtain this grace or redeem ourselves. It is said there that Buddhists think attaining their ‘supreme enlightenment by their own efforts’. Their whole redemption is by their own efforts. This is absolutely contrary to the Christian faith. Secondly, the ultimate aim of Buddhism is to enter into the ‘Nirvana’ i.e. into nothingness, to be dissolved, to be released from everything. It is like an annihilation of the person. That is the ultimate aim of their efforts. The Catholic religion is absolutely the opposite. What is our ultimate aim? To love God and be transformed by His grace and His charity so that we ourselves, our souls, become love and charity. So, our end is finally to enter in the uncreated charity, which is God. Our ultimate aim is the fulness, the highest virtue, the highest value you can imagine, that is to say love, charity; whereas Buddhism is absolutely the opposite. It is also clear that in Buddhism, as in other Asiatic religions, the axiom of contradiction is not recognised. What does this mean? This means that a thing can exist or not exist at the same time. For instance, either there is a glass or there is no glass on this table, but it is not possible that, at the same time, there be a glass and no glass. Have a look at Japan. You find more followers of religions in this country than the total number of the population. How is this possible? Well, several people belong to different religions at the same time and they find this quite logical. They belong to this religion and that religion because if one is false, the other might be true. My dear friends, these Asiatic religions are penetrating at an enormous rate into our countries, into Europe and the United States, with their ideas and practices, with all their system, their Hindu gurus, with yoga, transcendental meditation and with their idea of reincarnation. All this is being spread in our day, having an enormous influence on private and public life. They are acting, especially, through this movement called ‘New Age’ which has its symbol in the rainbow and is now penetrating everything, everywhere. It is very dangerous because it is a creature of esoterism originating from theosophy in the last century and from anthroposophy in our day. Islam What does the Council say about Islam? "Upon the Moslems, too, the Church looks with esteem. They adore one God, living and enduring, merciful and all-powerful, Maker of heaven and earth and Speaker to men. They strive to submit wholeheartedly even to His inscrutable decrees, just as did Abraham, with whom the Islamic faith is pleased to associate itself. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honour Mary, His virgin mother; at times they call on her, too, with devotion. In addition they await the day of judgement when God will give each man his due after raising him up. Consequently, they prize the moral life, and give worship to God especially through prayer, almsgiving, and fasting". (No. 3) What do you think when you read this text? You probably think that there are just some slight differences between us and the Moslems. They do not recognise the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, that is true, but that is not a very important thing! They venerate Him as a prophet, they give devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, they even believe in the last judgement, they give alms, they have a moral life. What they are not saying is that a Moslem can have several wives and that happiness in heaven, for them, is indicated by having many wives. The more wives you have, the happier will be in heaven. It is also not said in this text they are fighting against us and consider us as blasphemers and idolators because we adore Our Lord. They reject absolutely the Holy Trinity. All this is not mentioned, at all. A consequence of such text is that the German bishops have ordered all the parish priests to let the Moslems use their parish halls and kindergartens for their worship. It follows from this that every year Rome itself, the Holy See, gives an address of greeting to the Moslems at the beginning of their fasting months, the Ramadan, calling the blessing of Allah upon them. Another consequence of this is that a few years ago, the Lord Mayor of Rome gave about two hundred thousand square feet of land as a gift to the Moslems for the construction of an Islamic centre there, with its enormous mosque, the biggest mosque outside the Islamic world. It will be finished shortly and for the laying of the corner stone, the Holy See itself sent delegates to assist at such an important ceremony! My dear friends, what Islam did not achieve and succeed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, it achieves today by peaceful means, by immigration, in invading all our countries. For example, I just read an article saying that in England a new mosque is opened every two months. Every two months! That is incredible. Imagine if we were to open a new Mass centre every two months! This immigration of Pakistanis to England and Scandinavia, of the Turks to Germany, of the Arabs to France is completely destroying our national identity and furthermore the whole Christianity. Why did our ancestors fight against the Turks on October 7th, 1571, at the Battle of Lepanto? Why did they fight on September 12th, 1683, at the gates of Vienna? Because they realised the full danger at stake, especially the danger to their faith, and so, they fought against those who do not recognise the divinity of Our Lord, nor the Church, nor the Holy Trinity and so who do not have the same God. Jews What does the Council say about the Jews? This decree deals with the matter in its No. 4. It is a very delicate subject but let us look at it a little in the light of theology. It is clear that God had chosen one people to prepare for the coming of the Messiah and the time having come, this Messiah, prepared for by the prophets, was rejected by His own people who even crucified Him. It is clear that we, the Christians, are heirs to what the prophets have announced and to what Our Lord Jesus Christ has brought. We have the faith of Abraham. He is really our father. We have the same faith: Abraham believed in the future Redeemer, we believe in the same Redeemer who has come. The same Redeemer, the same faith. It is also clear that the Jews of our day cannot be called our elder brothers in the faith. How could the Pope say such a thing when he visited the synagogue, in Rome, three years ago? There is one other question. Can we say that the Jews are guilty of Deicide? We must say yes because it is they who asked for Our Lord’s death and called for His blood upon their heads and the heads of their children. I want to make it very clear: I do not speak about the Jews as a race, I speak about the Jews as a religion. So, what about the Jews of our day? Well, as long as they do not withdraw from this crime, from this action of their ancestors, they are also guilty of it. They must disassociate themselves from it and recognise Our Lord; they must be baptised and become His disciples. Spirit of Indifferentism My dear friends, such a sympathy towards the other religions must necessarily lead to events like Assisi, when the Pope gathered together all the religions in order to pray for peace in this world. It will destroy the supernatural order. There is no longer any concern for faith and sanctifying grace but all this is replaced by matters such as fighting against racism, singing for peace in this world, taking care of the environment, developing techniques, social progress in different countries, in the third world, etc. This spirit of indifferentism is penetrating everywhere to the utmost parts, to the smallest village in the world. I was just recently in Sri Lanka, island south of India, and the faithful there told me, on my arrival, that the very Sunday before, their parish priest had preached that in the future, there will be one world religion, that what up to this day we have rejected as idols we must in future adore and worship and that those who had shed their blood for the faith were a little bit insane. 4 - Declaration on Religious Liberty: ‘Dignitatis Humanae’ Let us now have a look at the question of religious liberty, the Declaration ‘Dignitatis Humanae’. What does Catholic doctrine say about this subject? It says that there is only one God, maker of all things, one Jesus Christ, one Church and that this Church and this Jesus Christ must be recognised by every creature, each and every individual and also by the social bodies: families, schools, states, etc. They must recognise Our Lord, by bringing Him into their constitutions, their laws, their lives. This means that all countries, especially those with a majority of Catholic citizens, should officially recognise Our Lord and His Church as the only religion and put limits to the public manifestations of other religions. You might say that it is unacceptable and terribly unjust for the state to restrain other religions. I will give you some examples of analogy in the moral sphere. If someone wants to commit suicide, has the state the right to prevent him from doing so? Yes it has. Has the state the duty to prevent him? Yes. If someone wants to have an abortion, has the state the right to prevent her from doing this? Yes. Has it the duty to do this? Yes. Now, these other religions are spreading their errors, harming souls. They are even dissolving, in a certain manner, the social order of the state. So, why should the state not have, under certain circumstances, the right and even the duty to put restrictions on these other religions? This was the case, for example, in the Spanish constitution before the Second Vatican Council. In a first paragraph it was said: "In Spain, the Catholic religion is the religion of the state". Second paragraph: "Nobody in his private life will be in any way embarrassed because of his belief". Third paragraph: "In public life, only the religion of the state has a right to be presented". This helped, a lot, to protect the faith of Catholics. This is precisely what the Islamic world is doing in our day. They are establishing Islamic states and it is very difficult to live there as Christians. So what they do towards the furtherance of error, why don’t we do for the truth? Our Lord does not reign any longer in our parliaments, in our constitutions, in our courts, in the affairs of our governments. He is put on the same level with the other religions in the constitutions, in the life of the social bodies. This is exactly what the Second Vatican Council has asked and demanded, that no religion should be hindered from spreading its errors, that every religion is to be treated with equality before the law. Listen to what the Council says on this subject: "This Vatican Synod declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom." (No. 2) So, religious freedom would be a natural right! This has always been rejected by the Church. "This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that in matters religious no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs." (No. 2) Up to this point, we can and must agree. In fact, the Church has always said that nobody can be forced to embrace the faith. Faith, by the way, is an interior act. But what follows is completely new. "Nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly". (No. 2) That’s the question: can anybody be hindered from openly spreading his false religion, his false ideology or can he not? He can and he must be in certain circumstances. This unlimited freedom, this liberty, gives way to an unlimited freedom of conscience, of opinion, of the press and even in moral matters. This gives the reasons behind, for example, the whole story of abortion, which has reached incredible figures now. The people who introduced it argued like this: no one is forced to have an abortion, the law simply removes some restrictions and thus freedom is given. But that is precisely the crime: no law can give anyone the right or freedom to have an abortion. That’s exactly what Pilate did when he made the people choose between Barabas and Our Lord Jesus Christ. You have the freedom: whom do you want: Barabas or Christ? Abortion or no abortion? A false religion or a true religion? It does not matter! 5 - Decree on the Church in the Modern World: ‘Gaudium et Spes’ We now come to the fifth decree of the Council which I want to discuss with you, that is ‘Gaudium et Spes’, the Church in the modern world. This decree gives a very optimistic vision of our world and is in complete accordance with the opening sermon, the opening homily of Pope John XXIII. (See ‘Opening speech of the Council’ above.) You will realise this immediately. "Today’s spiritual agitation and the changing conditions of life are part of a broader and deeper revolution. As a result of the latter, intellectual formation is ever increasingly based on the mathematical and natural sciences and on those dealing with man himself, while in the practical order the technology which stems from these sciences takes on mounting importance. This scientific spirit exerts a new kind of impact on the cultural sphere and on modes of thought. Technology is now transforming the face of earth, and is already trying to master outer space. To a certain extent, the human intellect is also broadening its dominion over time: over the past by means of historical knowledge; over the future by the art of projecting and by planning. Advances in biology, psychology, and the social sciences not only bring men hope of improved self-knowledge. In conjunction with technical methods, they are also helping men to exert direct influence on the life of social groups. At the same time, the human race is giving ever-increasing thought to forecasting and regulating its own population growth. History itself speeds along on so rapid a course that an individual person can scarcely keep abreast of it. The destiny of the human community has become all of a piece, where once the various groups of men had a kind of private history of their own. Thus, the human race has passed from a rather static concept of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one. In consequence there has arisen a new series of problems, a series as important as can be, calling for new efforts of analysis and synthesis." (No. 5) So, if you are accepting this, you are free to believe that by letting things go a little bit further, every problem will be solved. There will be perfect paradise on this earth. They are now even able to regulate the whole population growth by means of contraception. This seems at least indicated. It is then said that we must collaborate with all men and understand their feelings, their thoughts and their wishes, that we must live in very close union with the men of our time. Who are they? They are the Communists, the Freemasons, the heretics, the materialists. "May the faithful, therefore, live in very close union with the men of their time. Let them strive to understand perfectly their way of thinking and feeling, as expressed in their culture. Let them blend modern science and its theories and the understanding of the most recent discoveries with Christian morality and doctrine. Thus their religious practice and morality can keep pace with their scientific knowledge and with an ever-advancing technology. Thus, they will be able to test and interpret all things in a truly Christian spirit." (No. 62) So if you do not live with all these things, you can not have a truly Christian spirit. Thus our ancestors who did not know technology, had no true Christian spirit. These are the consequences. "While rejecting atheism, root and branch, the Church sincerely professes that all men, believers and unbelievers alike, ought to work for the rightful betterment of this world in which all alike live. Such an ideal cannot be realised, however, apart from sincere and prudent dialogue." (No. 21) St. Paul, contrary to this, admonishes the Christians of all times not to bear the yoke with unbelievers: "For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever?" (2 Cor. 6:14-15). It is also very astonishing that the Council inverts the aims of marriage. The first aim of marriage, according to the traditional teaching of the Church is and has always been the procreation of children. The second aim of marriage is mutual love. The Council is inverting these aims: In paragraph 49 of ‘Gaudium et Spes’ they are first of all speaking of conjugal love and in paragraph 50 of the fruitfulness of marriage. One must not be astonished that in 1968, when Pope Paul VI published his encyclical ‘Humanae Vitae’, there was an enormous storm of protest against this papal teaching because the Council gave a completely false idea and illusion. Cardinal Ratzinger himself has called this decree of the Council, ‘Gaudium et Spes’, ‘an anti-Syllabus’. Now what is the ‘Syllabus’? It is a collection of false sentences, of false statements, of errors, condemned under the pontificate of Pope Pius IX. The last of these sentences, the eightieth, states the following: "The Roman pontiff can and must reconcile himself with human progress, with liberalism and with modern and human culture". So, the Roman pontiff must establish a union between the spirit of Our Lord and the spirit of this world! That is exactly what happened during the Second Vatican Council and especially in this decree. It is a marriage, a sort of reconciliation between the world with its corruption, its non-belief and the Catholic religion. False Solution My dear friends, in these circumstances I have to warn you against illusions and false solutions to this problem. The problem will not be resolved in appointing here and there a conservative bishop who is still wearing the collar or who is still a little Marian or has personal devotion to the Pope. Nor will the solution to this problem be to establish a Society, such as that of St. Peter’s (formed by priests who have left the Society of St. Pius X after the consecration of bishops) and giving to this Society here and there, the right to celebrate the Old Mass. Neither will the solution be to be content with an Indult Mass here and there, which, in its first condition, puts the New Mass on the same level with the true Catholic Mass. True Solution The true solution, my dear friends, will be to re-establish Our Lord Jesus Christ as the Principle of all things, to re-enthrone Him, to give Him back His crown and His sceptre as snatched from Him, and to declare that He is the only Way of salvation, the only King, the only Redeemer, the only Saviour, the only High Priest and Victim, the only Judge of the living and the dead; that He must reign and that He alone is the solution to all the world’s problems. Yes, we are singing: "Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat" and we want Our Lord to reign. St. Paul says to the Corinthians: "Opportet illum regnare - it is necessary that He reigns" and St. Peter says in the Acts: "Non est in alio aliquo salus - there is no salvation in any other". If you ask the Blessed Virgin Mary what she thinks about Jesus she will say, "He is the only Saviour. My divine Son is the only God and His Church is the only divine religion, instituted by God Himself. You must recognise and believe this in order to be saved." "Keep the Faith - Pray" My dear brethren, be very strong in this confession, in maintaining your faith. I can assure you that everywhere in the world there are groups like your group here, who have the exact same desire, the same aim. I have just been travelling around eight Asian countries. I was in South Korea where there is a group of people in the capital, Seoul, who only heard about Archbishop Lefebvre two years ago. What did they do? "Ever since", they told me, "we have been praying one hour every day, for the Archbishop and the Society." What are the fruits of such a prayer? Seven young ladies, between the age of twenty and thirty want to enter the convent of the Society of St. Pius X and become nuns. Wonderful vocations. They were the ones who prepared the altar for the celebration of the Mass. They had also prepared another young lady for baptism, who had been a Buddhist. I was about to celebrate holy Mass in the evening when they asked me if I would leave the Blessed Sacrament, over night, until the early morning. I said: "I will leave it, if there is somebody to watch". They said: "Father, we will have adoration all night". And so I left the Blessed Sacrament and they adored Our Beloved Lord all night. A wonderful testimony. You find the same attitude in Japan. We already have two Japanese seminarians in our seminaries and during my trip, I was able to baptise three adults in that country. But there are also everywhere the same obstacles and the same trials. So, for example in Singapore, the local Archbishop threatened to excommunicate the whole group if they continued to support the priests of the Society. In Sri Lanka, formerly Ceylon, a parish priest told me: "My bishop is threatening me, if I do not accept to give Communion in the hand and employ lay ministers of the Eucharist etc., that I will lose my parish." He had the biggest parish in the whole diocese. He was former director of the seminary for boys and thirty-five of his former students are now priests. So, he is a very well-educated priest, an excellent priest. In the same country, a nun came to me saying: "I cannot live in my convent any longer; it is not possible. I am absolutely isolated because I cannot accept all these new things." That’s what is going on everywhere. My dear friends, you must pray. You must pray for a clearer understanding of your beliefs and to be firm in your convictions and see how the roots of the destruction are not just some abuses after the Council but are already in the Council itself. One day the true solution will be to examine the Council teachings, to reject what is against Tradition, to maintain what comforms to the teaching of the Church, to make clear what is ambiguous and only in such a way will the Church find again its identity. So, let us be very firm in this regard, together under the protection of the Blessed Virgin Mary.