A Conservative Priest Now Suspicious of the Novel 'Religious Liberty' Truth is Stranger than Fiction! Part One of a Three-part Essay on what is really behind the "Religious Liberty" spin
By Kathy Willett Redle|
Why Novus Ordinarian priest Fr. Brian Harrison is finally beginning to realize his syllogisms run into not only a roadblock, but a dead-end when trying to justify Church Doctrine and the Religious Liberty novelty of Dignatis Humanae.
"This article will illustrate that the Vatican II Declaration on Religious Liberty contradicts past Papal statements and steered a train driven off its own clearly laid tracts as stated in the pre-Vatican II conservative leaning schema, which were the original drafts drawn up for the council. Those which replaced the original were indeed a compendium of an ambiguous novel of pure fiction drafted by the minds of modernist periti who hoodwinked the council fathers. We can already see from Fr. Harrison's most recent, more sensible article how this idea was foisted on the unsuspecting fathers in a duplicitous way so as to vote positively for this dangerous document so riddled with ambiguity and new ideas. Although Fr. Harrison still maintains that Vatican II documents did not teach falsehood, 'we can see now that the Council paved the way for the diffusion of that error by consciously declining to teach, or even to suggest, the opposing but 'politically incorrect' truth.'"
Fr. Brian W. Harrison's article of March 31, 2004 in The Remnant "Skeletons in the Conciliar Closet" demonstrates a trend that more conservative Catholic priests are finally coming around to seeing the novelty of so many of the Vatican II "pastoral"statements which are not binding on the faithful. Pope Paul VI stated, "Given the Council's pastoral character, it avoided pronouncing in an extraordinary manner, dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility;" and as Archbishop Felicia stated: "We have to distinguish according to the schemas and chapters those which have already been the subject of dogmatic definition in the past: as for the declarations which have a novel character, we have to make reservations." Fr. Harrison has written several article's over the years defending that novel document and one book telling us that "Religious Liberty" was not incompatible with past teaching, whereas even The progressivist priest John Courtney Murray, the primary architect of this Revolutionary document, admitted that it was not reconcilable to past papal teaching and that it would be up to some future theologian to give us a defense of how it could be reconcilable. Well, it seemed that Fr. Harrison stepped up to the plate with no less than seven articles over the years trying to reconcile it in the light of Catholic tradition.
Fr. Harrison is a priest who is appalled by the modernism in the Church and does all he can to curtail it in his books, tapes and articles. He meant well in the past by defending this document on "Religious Liberty" or Dignitatis Humanae (DH) and may think that by having done so he was defending the indefectibility of the Church. However, one can ask was this document really meant to be on the level of even the ordinary magisterium? How could it be on the level of the ordinary magisterium when it contradicts past teaching? It must be pointed out that the past teaching on religious liberty properly understood is not tyrannical. Nor was the Index a bad idea because it warned Catholics about books which were harmful to their souls because of the errors contained in them. What good parent would let a child look at playboy??? Yet, the Index, established by Pope Paul IV in 1559, was abandoned by Vatican II in 1964. 1
The Index is forbidden in Vatican II see INTRODUCTION TO MY BOOK - Vatican II : The Church is opening up to the modern world. by Tevas Raimundas OFM
which states that, on Monday, October 5, 1964,
Hans Kuhner: Index Romanus: It was translated and published in France by the Catholic house of Spes, and is a violent attack against the catalogue of prohibited books.
Georges-Christophe Lichtenberg: "The one book in the world that most deserves to be prohibited is the catalogue of prohibited books."
This Index catalogue began in 1557 under Paul IV.
In l948 all the works of Jean-Paul Sartre were condemned.
l952 those of Andre Gide.
l954 Nikos Kazantzakis: The Last Temptation of Christ.
l956 Simone de Beauvoir: The second sex and The Mandarins.
l961: The Life of Christ by Father Steinmann.
XVIIth century: the complete works of 93 authors.
XVIIIth century: the complete works of 52 authors.
XIXth century: the complete works of l9 authors.
XXth century: the complete works of l6 authors.
Jean Baptiste Sherer: "It is the cemetery of Catholic intellectual life".
All of Christianity confidently expects Paul VI to put an end to the permanent crusade. The Index wages against the mind and against man." This reference shows the typical liberal reaction to common sense. The church wanted to warn us about the heresy in such writings of Sartre, Kazantzakis, and of course, Lamannais 1861 - Paroles d'un croyant Lamennais, Hugues-Felicite-Robert Holy See 1834 Banned; 1855-1860 Affaires de Rome Lamennais, Hugues-Felicite-Robert Holy See 1837 Banned; 1856 Amschaspands et Darvands Lamennais, Hugues-Felicite-Robert Holy See 1843 Banned; 1857 Discussions critiques et pensees diverses sur la religion et la philosophie Lamennais, Hugues-Felicite-Robert Holy See 1841 Banned; 1858 Esquisse d'une philosophie Lamennais, Hugues-Felicite-Robert Holy See 1841 Banned 1859; Le livre du peuple Lamennais, Hugues-Felicite-Robert Holy See 1838 Banned; 1860 Les evangelies Lamennais, Hugues-Felicite-Robert Holy See 1846 Banned. Another occult website stated "In 1817 esotericist Félicitéé Robert de Lamennais published his Essai sur l'indiffëërence en matièère de religion filled with references to Jones, Asiatik Researches, the Upanishads, and the Zoroastrian Avesta."(See Western Esotericism, Eastern Spirituality, and the Global Future by Lee Irwin.)
In Lamennais' D la Tolerance (1837) p334-335 Lamennais speaks of Voltaire's "common ground of humanity" which became 'dogmatic' or 'philosophic' tolerence devised as Lamennais put it to "favor the progress of a philosophy of which doubt is the essence." See pg 337 of Lamennais book. This passage of his statements are taken from The Problem of Tolerance and Social Existence in the Writings of Felicite Lamennais 1809-1831. This sounds a bit like Cardinal Bernardin's "Common Ground." Lamennais began as a apologist for ultra montanism or the doctrine of papal infallibility but he ended up by 1835 rejecting that doctrine and the teachings of the Holy Catholic Church. It is important to note that Lamennais died refusing to be reconciled to the Church. Then in a book titled Lamennais and England by W. G. Roe (1966), p. 24 Lamennais' ideas are paraphrased as expressing the following in De la Societe premiere et de ses lois, ou De la religion (1848), "In religion nothing is fixed. As society progresses, dogma and science converge: man achieves greater unity with God. This means that it is not necessary to believe that God was made man or other 'fables surannees, because religion is only the finite expression of the divine law....all formal religions are an expression of egoism, a means of separating self from the rest of mankind." It is no wonder that the Church banned his books and condemned his work in two papal encyclicals by Pope Pius IX in Mirari Vos 1832 and Singulari Nos 1834. As Alec R. Vidler wrote in Prophecy and Papacy, page 24: "in 1841, he no longer accepted the hypothesis of a supernatural order. Thus he rejected traditional notions of an external revelation, of miracles, and of arbitrary divine interventions. He says nothing in these notes (Discussions critiques) about Christology...rejects expiatory theories of atonement...still attacks deism, though he himself seems nearer to deism now than to any form of traditional orthodoxy."
A liberal professor of law John T. Noonan, Jr. of Milo, Rees, Robbins firm and a Professor of Law and Legal Ethics at the University of California Law School, Berkeley, shows in his paper "MAGNA EST VERITAS" and demonstrates how Lamennais' ideas triumphed at Vatican Council II with John Courtney Murray's theology which drew from his liberal predecessor "GREAT IS TRUTH: IT PREVAILS"
Oddly both Vidler (Ibid)on pgs 273-274 mention this comparison as does Roe (Ibid) pgs 191, 192 yet Mr. Noonan doesn't mention Roe or Vidler in his footnotes.
In the third session of Vatican II, in 1964, Archbishop Denis Hurley of South Africa spoke against the conservative council fathers voicing opposition to schema 13 (which was to become the basis of the pastoral constitution Gaudium et spes by defending Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's vision as "at once religious, scientific, evolutionary, and eschatological." While Bhopal's Archbishop Eugene D'Souza commented positively "As if the scandal of Galileo was not enough, we have since had the cases of Lamennais, Darwin, Marx, Freud, and more recently, Teilhard de Chardin." He further stated, "Their works, not without error, were fighting for the very things that our schema recognizes and yet their works were indiscriminately condemned." (See "From silence to vindication: Teilhard de Chardin & the Holy Office" which appeared in Commonweal on October 25, 2002 by Robert Nugent continued from page 2. So we can see how the Vatican and Vatican Council II are vindicating liberals whose ideas were formerly condemned. After Vatican II the liberals threw out any form of censorship except of course when it comes to any traditional ideas. Reading bad books leads to the death of people's souls. Just look at all of the lost souls influenced by the bad catechism books and yet the Baltimore Catechism is shelved because it's "pre Vatican II."
Moreover, before Vatican II the Catholic Church taught that in Catholic countries the state must work with the Catholic Church and not undermine it for the benefit of souls and that Catholic Constitutions, which protect marriage and the sanctity of life, are paramount. Today the Church cooperates with entities like the UN and the European Union mistakenly thinking they can change these humanistic, Masonic inspired institutions. There was a good article in Latin Mass Magazine Spring 2004 "How Malta Has Kept the Faith" by James Bemis which clearly demonstrates that it is cooperation of church and State, not its separation, which engenders and protects a 98 % Catholic Culture there. Malta became part of the European Union in 2003 so one wonders how long they will be able to withstand the pro-abortion, divorce and homosexual "marriage" agenda of that body and still remain in it, while continuing as a Catholic Country.
Malta has a Catholic Constitution which says, Chapter 1 article "2. (1) The religion of Malta is the Roman Catholic Apostolic Religion.
(2) The authorities of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church have the duty and the right to teach which principles are right and which are wrong.
(3) Religious teaching of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Faith shall be provided in all State schools as part of compulsory education."
See Constitution of Malta
Currently the Maltese government works with the Catholic Church by making mandatory Catholic education in public schools, making illegal such things as divorce and abortion, thereby preserving family life, and promoting the Social Kingship of Christ. Now Malta demonstrates perennial Catholic teaching and not the separation of Church and state implied in the (DH) document. A Catholic Country should have the right due to Catholic principles in its Catholic Constitution to restrict the public spread of other non Catholic religions. Law by its very nature is restrictive and thus coercive. The Catholic Church has always condemned the idea of a secular "religious liberty" because it leads to religious indifference. The document on Religious Liberty says something very different from past teaching as this article will demonstrate. Even Vatican II fathers and periti have noted the contradiction.
"It cannot be denied that a text like this does materially say something different from the Syllabus of 1864, and even almost the opposite of propositions 15 and 77-79 of the document." (Father Yves Congar, "The Crisis in the Church and Archbishop Lefebvre", Cerf, 1976. p.51) So someone like the liberal Congar sees the "crisis" as the conservative/traditionalist who will not accept his novelties which he calls "reforms."
"Lefebvre has every right to question the Council's Declaration on Religious Freedom, Kung says, because Vatican II completely reversed Vatican I's position without explanation ..... He reminisces over the late night conversations with Fr John Courtney Murray (the American who guided the Council thought on religious liberty): 'The Council bishops said, "It's too complicated to explain how you can go from a condemnation of religious liberty to an affirmation of it purely by the notion of progress.'"
[Interview with Fr. H. Kung: National Catholic Reporter (21st October 1977)]
This article will illustrate that the Vatican II Declaration on Religious Liberty contradicts past Papal statements and steered a train driven off its own clearly laid tracts as stated in the pre Vatican II (drafts drawn up for the council) conservative leaning schema. It is indeed an ambiguous novel of pure fiction drafted by the minds of modernist periti who hoodwinked the council fathers. We can already see from Fr. Harrison's most recent, more sensible article how this idea was foisted on the unsuspecting fathers in a duplicitous way so as to vote positively for this dangerous document so riddled with ambiguity and new ideas. Although Fr. Harrison still maintains that Vatican II documents did not teach falsehood, "we can see now that the Council paved the way for the diffusion of that error by consciously declining to teach, or even to suggest, the opposing but 'politically incorrect' truth."
The problems with the documents are that they are ambiguous and can be taken either way -- conservative or liberal depending on how you want to read them. Father Edward Schillebeeckx admitted, "we have used ambiguous phrases during the Council and we know how we will interpret them afterwards."(Open Letter to Confused Catholics," Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Kansas City, Angelus Press, 1992, p. 106.)
This has been chronicled very well in such books as The Rhine Flows into the Tiber and Atila Sinke Guimarães' In The Murky Waters of Vatican II, and Animus Delendi I and Animus Delendi II. Rahner regarding the ambiguities: "Naturally, here or there the unity of all in liberty was diligently sought and obtained in this Council though the tactic of leaving questions unsolved or by other means which, at first sight, may appear as an unfortunate compromise. But even in these cases, true unity was attained in a climate of authentic freedom. see Karl Rhaner, "Vaticano II: Um coeco de renvocao (Sao Paulo: Herder, 1966), p. 12 as quoted in The Murky Waters of Vatican II by Guimarães, p. 95. How can compromise serve the truth in drafting theological documents?
Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx said about Vatican II "…a few intended to adopt formulas with double meaning so that the field would be open to the interpretation of 'papal collegiality.'" see "Wij denken gepassioneerd en in cliches's, in De Azuin," January 1965, in A. Acerbi, op. cit, p. 472 as quoted by In the Murky Waters of Vatican II by Atila S. Guimaraes p.97
The New York Times recognized these ambiguities: "The Council's documents, shaped by the bishops and their theological advisers in four two-month sessions held each fall from 1962 through 1965, offer more than enough compromises and ambiguities for conflicting interpretations."
In contrast we see the clarity of Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794 Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794: "[The Ancient Doctors] knew the capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, they sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith which is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation... For very good reason it can never be tolerated in a Synod of which the principal glory consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding all danger of error... It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it... In order to expose such snares, something which becomes necessary with a certain frequency in every century, no other method is required then the following: Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements which disguise some suspected error or danger under the veil of ambiguity, one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed to Catholic truth is camouflaged."
Oddly enough there were no denunciations (or anathemas) in VII according to the wishes of Pope John XXIII to "make use of the medicine of mercy rather than that of severity." "Religious Liberty" is an idea which never denounces- it praises other religions for being "more or less good and praiseworthy." Pope John XXIII thought in his overly optimistic "aggiornamento" (or updating) opening speech on October 11, 1962 (as he decried the "prophets of gloom" and doom) that if the Church updated herself and shed the "divine light of the Church" which illumines all men- they would naturally turn in "brotherly unity" to end all discord, and "turn their minds to heavenly things." Or "Divine Providence is leading us to a new order of human relations which, by men's own efforts and even beyond their very expectations, are directed toward the fulfillment of God's superior and inscrutable designs. And everything, even human differences, leads to the greater good of the Church." Try telling this to your children when they disobey and argue and see if it works in a family. Forty years later the Church and the world are in a real mess. We have truly entered a "brave new world order."
"There is at this day a confederacy of evil, marshalling its hosts from all parts of the world, organizing itself, taking its measures, enclosing the Church of Christ as in a net, Apostasy and all its tokens and instruments are of the evil one and savior of death. He offers baits to tempt men: he promises liberty, equality (is this what VII did?), trade and wealth, remission of taxes, reforms. He promises illumination, knowledge, science, philosophy, enlargement of mind. He scoffs at times gone by, at sacred traditions, at every institution, which reveres them. He bids man mount aloft, to become a god. He laughs and jokes with men, gets intimate with them, takes their hands, gets his fingers between theirs, grasps them and then they are his." - John Henry Cardinal Newman (1801-1890). 2
2. see The Patristical Idea of Antichrist
(in Four Lectures) with Lecture 1. The Times of Antichrist, section 4. Here are some more good quotes on reformers and their real agenda:
"Some persons speak of reforming the Church and giving up the Church's
laws, traditions, and aspirations.... They feel that the whole structure of
the Church should be revised, and that the laws of the Church are outmoded
and out-of-step with the present times. Those persons are not on the right
road. They bring sorrow to the Church and undermine her spiritual and social
structure." - Pope Paul VI, February 21, 1966
"I hear around me reformers who want to dismantle the Holy Sanctuary,
destroy the universal flame of the Church, to discard all her adornments,
and smith her with remorse for her historic past." - Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli,
later Pope Pius XII (1939-1958), to Count Enrico Pietro Galeazzi
"My Lord, I understand that there is a Reformation in Religion
intended by the Parliament; and I wish that several things were reformed;
but let me tell you that when you have reformed, that others will come, and
refine upon you, and others again upon them; et sic deinceps, that at last
there will be no Religion left, but Atheism will spring up. The Mysteries
of Religion are to be let alone; they will not bear an examination." -
"I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves
today results in large part from the collapse of the liturgy.... The
liturgical reform has produced extremely grave damage for the Faith". -
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith, La mia vita (San Paolo Editor, 1997)
"Ronald Knox, who died in 1957, did not witness the Council, but he was aware of the coming destruction of the liturgy. He spoke of the liturgical reformers as "a strange alliance between archaeologists absorbed in their speculations on the rites of the second century, and modernists who wish to give the Church the character of our deplorable epoch." On one occasion someone requested him to use the vernacular in the baptismal rite. His response was, 'The baby doesn't understand English and the Devil knows Latin." see Latin Mass Magazine Spring 2004 pgs 84-85.
From Vatican II Document on "Religious Liberty" Dignitatis Humanae
(Chapter II paragraph 9) "The Declaration of this Vatican Council on the right of man to religious freedom has its foundation in the dignity of the person, whose exigencies have come to be more fully known to human reason through centuries of experience... Revelation does not indeed affirm in so many words the right of man to immunity from external coercion in matters religious. It does, however, disclose the dignity of the human person in its full dimensions."
The pastoral Vatican II decree demands that states concede to false religions the right to exist:
(Chapter I paragraph 2) "This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom... The Council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person, as this dignity is known through the revealed Word of God and by reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed; thus it is to become a civil right."
I might say that man does not have dignity in and of himself but only because God made him. Man therefore has his first duty to God not in speaking of his own dignity but in worshiping the dignity of the Holy Trinity. Man is but a blade of grass as scripture tells us born to wither and die.
(Chapter I pargraph.2) "Therefore, the right to religious freedom has its foundation, not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth... and the exercise of this right is not be impeded as long as the just requirements of public order are observed."
Note: "public order" is a Masonic word which the French Revolutionaries employed and is a term used four times in the document whereas the Catholic Church before Vatican II spoke about the "common good" a term used only once in the document. 3
See the document "Declaration of the Rights of Man - 1789" which says, "10. No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including his religious views, provided their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law." Then a Magazine called Scottish Memories featured this article titled "The Maybole Templars": "A French prelate, the Abbe August Barruel, claimed Freemasonry was responsible for the civil strife then sweeping Europe. According to him, the French Revolution had been a Masonic plot against the established secular order and the Church. Likewise westward across the Atlantic one need only look at an American dollar bill, with the Masonic symbol of the all-seeing eye inside a triangle above a four-sided, 13-stepped pyramid, to appreciate the role that Masonic influences had in the formulation of the Declaration of Independence. At least ten of the signatories to that world shattering document were Masons. Likewise, a copy of its contemporary, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, also featured much Masonic symbolism; and a significant number of Parisian revolutionaries were also Masons, including Desmoulins, Danton and Sieyes. Robespierre' s father had founded lodges in France, allegedly under the guidance of the exiled Charles Edward Stuart."
It is not just enough to have "public order" but to save men's souls one's purpose in restricting so called freedoms is for the good of the individual's soul. This (DH) states "Finally, government is to see to it that equality of citizens before the law, which is itself an element of the common good, is never violated, whether openly or covertly, for religious reasons. Nor is there to be discrimination among citizens.") The liberals very cleverly inserted the Catholic term "common good" for this idea that you can not discriminate. However, this idea contradicts past infallible teachings from past popes who demonstrated that a civil society must discriminate with certain things otherwise anarchy and sexual licentiousness reigns. We must have civil laws which restrict and use discrimination regarding people's behavior- that is what laws do.
Try telling a policeman that you were exercising your freedoms when you go 50 miles per hour in a school zone or steal your neighbor's car. The law is a coercive force to enforce morality and it must be used for the "common good" otherwise you have anarchy and Revolution and lost souls which leads to totalitarianism in the form of Communism, Masonry or Nazism or you have the moral corruption and materialism of Western Capitalism gone sour resulting in the complete decay of social institutions such as marriage, family life and the attempt to institutionalize the homosexual lifestyle with "homosexual marriage". Those roads lead to hell.
So much for the public disorder we have witnessed in the post-conciliar era. Sex outside of marriage, birth control and divorce is in: the exclusivity of sex within marriage; openness to babies and life long marriage is out; sex as for pleasure is in, sex for procreation is out, reproduction with artificial means such as sperm banks in vitro fertilization are practiced by the laity while at the same time we have a mushrooming of AIDS, homosexual lifestyles/"marriage," pederasty and pedophilia and, of course, abortion. The result is we no are longer (to borrow Judge Robert Bork's term) "slouching toward Gomorrah" but are in the midst of a catastrophic mudslide...or is that muckslide!? Sure the Church still tows the line with these moral teachings on paper (they know they would lose the conservative support if they didn't, and the Holy Ghost won't let them do it) but the Bishops and priests don't preach it from the pulpit and barely anyone is disciplined for infractions. Lest we get caught and become spiritually extinct as the dinosaurs did in this filthy tar pit of deadly utopia we had better stay away from this so-called "civilization of love" that everyone talks so cheaply about but is demonstrated so little in our New "International Disorder."
Kathy Willett Redle
Next: Part Two Past Ordinary Infallible Church Teaching on Religious Liberty