April 23, 2002
volume 13, no. 77

E-mail       Print
Vatican II: Weapon of Mass Destruction

Part Two

by Michael Matt , editor, The Remnant
    Reprinted with the gracious permission of editor Michael J. Matt of The Remnant

The "Council of Vigilance"

    In his great encyclical letter, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, St. Pius X did not say to the priests and bishops of the world: “Concentrate, Venerable Brethren, on the many beautiful aspects of the faith and liturgy, and this will see you through. It will suffice if you can just manage to maintain use of the venerable liturgy and learn to peacefully coexist with the Modernists who are taking over the rest of the Church. If you do this and if you pray, you will be fine.”

    Good grief! Such pointless pious platitudes coming from St. Pius X are unthinkable! His marching orders were a good bit more forceful than telling Catholic priests to walk around looking like they just hopped off a holy card, while waxing rhapsodic about what Catholics are for! This canonized saint called for the precise targeting of what Catholics are against—and then ordered the systematic eradication of those targets:

        But of what avail, Venerable Brethren, will be all Our commands and prescriptions if they be not dutifully and firmly carried out? In order that this may be done, it has seemed expedient to us to extend to all dioceses the regulations which the Bishops of Umbria, with great wisdom, laid down for theirs many years ago. "In order," they say, ''to extirpate the errors already propagated and to prevent their further diffusion, and to remove those teachers of impiety through whom the pernicious effects of such diffusion are being perpetuated, this sacred Assembly, following the example of St. Charles Borromeo, has decided to establish in each of the dioceses a Council consisting of approved members of both branches of the clergy, which shall be charged with the task of noting the existence of errors and the devices by which new ones are introduced and propagated, and to inform the Bishop of the whole, so that he may take counsel with them as to the best means for suppressing the evil at the outset and preventing it spreading for the ruin of souls or, worse still, gaining strength and growth."[31] We decree, therefore, that in every diocese a council of this kind, which We are pleased to name the “Council of Vigilance,” be instituted without delay. The priests called to form part in it shall be chosen somewhat after the manner above prescribed for the censors, and they shall meet every two months on an appointed day in the presence of the Bishop. They shall be bound to secrecy as to their deliberations and decisions, and in their functions shall be included the following: they shall watch most carefully for every trace and sign of Modernism both in publications and in teaching, and to preserve the clergy and the young from it they shall take all prudent, prompt, and efficacious measures. Let them combat novelties of words, remembering the admonitions of Leo XIII: "It is impossible to approve in Catholic publications a style inspired by unsound novelty which seems to deride the piety of the faithful and dwells on the introduction of a new order of Christian life, on new directions of the Church, on new aspirations of the modern soul, on a new social vocation of the clergy, on a new Christian civilization, and many other things of the same kind."(Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Page 65-66, St. Paul Editions).

    This papal exhortation to the priests and bishops of the world is applied succinctly to our own time in one line on the back cover of Michael Davies’ outstanding book Partisans of Error: “Every Catholic who loves his faith has a duty to combat the spread of a triumphantly resurgent Modernism.” One does not combat a ruthless enemy by agreeing to peacefully coexist with him, or by chatting with him about one’s liturgical preferences, or even by humming a few bars of the Te Deum in his general direction. Where else is Modernism more “triumphantly resurging” than in the “new ecclesial reality”—that tired “civilization of love”—and in the aberration that is the New Mass.

    Combating the errors of the neo-Modernists today is impossible without unequivocally admitting that the Council and its brainchild—the Novus Ordo Missae—were catastrophic prudential errors, which must be held accountable for the spiritual carnage we see all around us today. If we content ourselves with a Soviet-style “peaceful coexistence” with the neo-Modernists who vastly outnumber us, it is their cause which will outlive ours, because in that coexistence our children will find no crusade worth fighting, and the weapons handed down to them will fall from their hands. If the Mass is just a matter of personal preference, then the new theology that is thus implicitly condoned will retain its ability to cause the old Faith to grow cold in our children’s hearts, just as it has in the hearts of millions of children throughout the world.Freemasons and the Council?

Freemasons and the Council?

    It must be kept in mind that those who worked so tirelessly to return Campos to full communion with the Vatican are the world’s most enthusiastic supporters of the Second Vatican Council. This fact, in conjunction with the following quotation, supplies the basis for the reason that some of us are just “paranoid” enough to postpone our celebration of the historic Campos Compromise.

    First, the quote from the masterpiece Athanasius and the Church Of Our Time by Bishop Rudolf Graber of Regensburg. Bishop Graber was, in 1941, appointed professor in Church history, theology and mysticism at the Academy for Philosophy and Theology in Eichstatt. He was to become one of the most widely known and respected European theologians. He was consecrated Bishop of Regensburg in 1962 by Pope John XXIII. In this quote, Bishop Graber touches on a very controversial point—the Masonic conspiracy and its relation to the Second Vatican Council. Citing Canon Roca (1830-1893), the apostate and excommunicated Catholic priest who forecast the Second Vatican Council, Graber writes:

        In the following we shall quote various passages from Roca’s works which throw light on our present crisis. With reference to the future liturgy, he believes “that the divine cult in the form directed by the Roman Church will shortly undergo a transformation at an ecumenical council (!), which will restore to it the venerable simplicity of the golden age of the Apostles in accordance with the dictates of conscience and modern civilization.” And Roca continues: “There is a sacrifice in the offing which represents a solemn act of expiation…. The Papacy will fall; it will die under the hallowed knife which the fathers of the last council will forge. The papal Caesar is a Host crowned for the sacrifice.”

        We are struck by the fact that at that time there was already mention of a council. The Rosicrucian, Dr. Rudolf Setiner, the founder of the Anthropomorphic Society, declared in 1910: “We need a council and a Pope to proclaim it.” Was the enthusiastic welcome with which the Council was acclaimed perhaps nourished from this source, too? Roca’s dominating idea is the word “new.” He proclaims a “new religion,” a “new dogma,” a “new ritual,” “new priesthood.” He calls the new priests “progressists,” he speaks of the “suppression” of the soutane [cassock] and of the marriage of priests….

        From all the [Roca] quotations, which could be expanded into books, it is not difficult to discover already the tactics being employed: to deprive the Church it its supernatural character, to amalgamate it with the world, to interweave the denominations ecumenically instead of letting them run side by side as separate confessions, and thus to pave the way for a standard world religion in the centralized world state.
    (Athanasius and the Church in Our Time, by Bishop Rudolf Graber, Van Duren, Page 35-37)

    Again, all the “approved” Masses in the world will not—barring a miracle—change the fact that there is a conspiracy going on inside the Church today which is helping to create a dangerous and unstable world, which is destroying family life, and which reached its zenith at the Second Vatican Council. Nor can this realization be tempered by the fact that the soon-to-retire Cardinal Ratzinger, an enthusiastic promoter of Vatican II, thinks tradition-minded Catholics should be allowed to have the Mass they like best. When Cardinal Ratzinger finally gets around to admitting that Vatican II spawned a crisis in the Church of the highest order, I’ll bet Bishop Fellay would charter a flight to Rome the very same day, and The Remnant would be happy to make a donation to the SSPX in the amount of the charter cost.

Next Thursday: Part Three

April 23, 2002
volume 13, no. 77
Return to Current Issue