Excerpts from Animus Delendi - II
From time to time we will be bringing you passages, in their entirety, from Atila's latest book Animus Delendi - II. Today he presents the introduction of his latest book which we encourage you to purchase and read for it for it holds the key to all that is happening today.
SECULARIZATION AND ECUMENISM
the Two Principal Maneuvers of Vatican II
A serious study of the "spirit of the Council" and the progressivist blueprint for the self-destruction of the Church requires consideration of the two principal initiatives that characterize the "conciliar revolution": secularization and ecumenism, or as they were known originally, aggiornamento and dialogue.
The much trumpeted aggiornamento is characterized by the adaptation of the Church to the modern world, that is to say, to its principles and tendencies that proceed remotely from Humanism, the Renaissance, and Protestantism and, more proximately, from the French Revolution. These principles and tendencies of egalitarianism and liberalism veered broadly on the "evolutionary" path toward Communism and, ultimately, to self-managing tribalism.
The Council displayed a euphoric enthusiasm for the modern world, particularly evident in a document and a symbolic act. The document was the Constitution Gaudium et spes, considered the main girder for aggiornamento.
The symbolic act was Paul VI's visit to the United Nations to offer the world organization his complete solidarity, as well as that of all the conciliar Fathers.
The Council ended with the progressivist victory, and the euphoria of the partisans of this current continued. Everywhere in the Church there was evidence of the progressivist affaire d'amour with the modern world.
This romance, however, was short-lived.
In 1968 the death knell began to toll for the modern world with the student uprisings of the Sorbonne Revolution. "Reason is dead!" "It is prohibited to prohibit!" were cries that were now heard on the same streets of Paris where, two hundred years before, the "goddess Reason" had been carried to Notre Dame Cathedral to be adored by the pioneers of the modern world.
What was the response of the Conciliar Church - with her aggiornamento and secularization - once the modern world engendered a revolution that called for its own death? What would the spirit of the Council adapt itself to now?
The Conciliar Church changed its affections.
To the measure that secularization still served the purpose of challenging the prior two-thousand-year old attitude of the Catholic Church toward the world, it continued to preach the necessity for this adaptation. Sensing, however, that death was already embracing the modern world, the Conciliar Church directed its greatest enthusiasm and much of its support to movements inside the Church that echoed the revolutionary aims of the Sorbonne: Liberation Theology, Basic Christian Communities, Pentecostal movements, and underground churches.
At the same time, the Conciliar Church took a practical attitude of indifferent complacency toward the development of Feminist Theology and Homosexual Theology. Doing this, the Church propitiated the destruction of the same modern world for which just shortly before she had shown such euphoric admiration.
This contradictory behavior also generated different interpretations of the term secularization. Aggiornamento, a word charged with talismanic meanings, signified the irresistible force of seduction of the world and the outdated position of those who would oppose it. With time, however, this word lost much of its efficacy. Secularization was the word that replaced aggiornamento.
For a student of History, secularization means the progressive separation of temporal institutions from the sacral influence of the Church that characterized medieval Christendom. [ 1. Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, n. 28.]
To this historical interpretation, the progressivists added two meanings:
First, secularization refers to the adaptation of the Church to the modern world, with its egalitarian philosophical principles and its liberal morals. To fulfill her mission, the Church would need to adapt herself to the world as it is today: de-sacralized and separated from her. Departing from this erroneous premise, the Church should only admit in her own institution what would be acceptable to the world. Secularization would be, in this sense, a phenomenon of internal adaptation of the Church to the world.
Second, secularization came to indicate the change that needed to be made by the Church's initiative in the Modern State itself - in its laws, customs, and institutions - in order to adapt it to the new "sign of the times" that surged in 1968 at the Sorbonne and elsewhere.
On one hand, this second meaning contradicts the first. On the other hand, it is a consequence of it. To the measure that the Church has adapted herself to the world, she must help to destroy the points in which the world is still not sufficiently aggiornato. Thus, secularization could justify the preaching of Liberation Theology and show complaisance toward Feminist Theology, Homosexual Theology, etc. Each in its own field, these "theologies" aim to abolish the "structures of sin," that is to say, the social-political and moral remnants of a past organic society that still survived in the Capitalist world. This type of secularization serves to steer the revolutionary efforts toward implanting a new Communist world, which is rapidly heading toward a self-managed and tribalist world. In this sense, secularization is an action of the Church upon the world to change it.
Secularization is, then, a term that appropriately reflects a whole gamut of relationships that the Conciliar Church has resolved to assume before the modern world. And it is as such that the term will be adopted in this study of the spirit of the Council.
Ecumenical dialogue is also one of the keynotes of the conciliar spirit.
Initiated with John XXIII's invitation to observers from other religions to assist at the Council, dialogue was vigorously supported under the pontificates of Paul VI and John Paul II.
It seems that the first phase of the paradigmatic relationship of dialogue took place with the policy of the Popes toward the Eastern Schism. During the Council, under the pretext of not offending the Russian Schismatic Church, John XXIII and Paul VI exerted all their power to prevent any condemnation of Communism. Representing the Russian Schismatic Church at Vatican II were Vitaly Borovoi and Vladimir Kotliarov, both well-known puppets of the Soviet government working under the orders of the patriarchate of Moscow.
Later Paul VI would make multiple efforts to promote dialogue with the Schismatics by means of the Secretariat for the Unity of Christians. A symbolic event that furthered inter-confessional understanding was Paul VI's meeting with patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople in the Garden of Olives (January 5, 1964), when they embraced and kissed. Nothing like this had taken place since the Schism in the 11th century!
A few months later, during a solemn ceremony on the Island of Patras (September 7, 1964), Cardinal Agostino Bea, in the name of Paul VI, delivered to the Schismatics the head of the Apostle Saint Andrew, which had been conserved in Rome since the 15th century. 2. M. Mourin, Le Vatican et l'URSS, p. 283. As always, the aim was to facilitate a rapprochement with the Greek Schismatics.
Another symbolic step occured at the end of the Council when, in the Brief Ambulate in dilectione, Paul VI expressed "great sorrow" for the excommunication launched in 1054 against Michael Cerularius with the intent of annulling it. To confirm this intent, an official supposed annulment was made the next day in a joint statement by Paul VI and Athenagoras. These acts were also intended to rescind the sentence of schism.
Along this path of dialogue with the Schismatics, it is indispensable to mention the unheard-of and humiliating action of Paul VI, who prostrated himself on the ground to kiss the feet of the metropolitan Meliton,[3. This took place on December 14, 1975.] "spiritual heir of Athenagoras." [4. Informations Catholiques Internationales, August 1972, p. 9.]
During his long pontificate John Paul II has faithfully followed the same road of Paul VI. For example, the joint blessing given by John Paul II and Dimitrios I in the Basilica of St. Peter [5. L'Osservatore Romano, December 7-8, 1987, p. 5.] is symbolic of his line of conduct toward the "Orthodox."
Thus has dialogue with the Schismatics passed through all the various phases needed to subvert the earlier position of the Church:
First, in opposition to the constant teaching of the Popes, it abdicated the fight against Communism.
Second, without demanding any doctrinal or disciplinary retractions from the Schismatics, "dialogue" skipped over stages of the ecumenical process to reach its final phase, that is, "communion," symbolized by the kiss in the Garden of Olives.
Third, Paul VI "repented" and tried to abrogate the sentence of schism, an indisputably clear and appropriate judgment and official teaching of the Church for nine centuries.
Finally, fourth, Paul VI tried to take dialogue to its most radical consequences. Prostrating himself on the ground and kissing the feet of the Schismatic metropolitan Meliton, he symbolically let the faithful understand that this should be the normal attitude of the Catholic Church in face of the Schism…
The example of the trajectory followed by the Conciliar Church with the Eastern Schismatics is expressive of its general policies regarding ecumenism. Thus, in this Introduction, I will refrain from describing an analogous process the Conciliar Church has adopted in its inter-confessional relations with each of the multiple false religions.
Here it is important to point out that conciliar ecumenism, which was born from dialogue, would soon surpass it to enter into a new phase of rapprochement with false religions: that of "communion."
The word dialogue, applied to relations of the Catholic Church with other creeds, was used to express the state of spirit of one who had abandoned discussion and polemics based on reasons of Faith, in order to inaugurate an open, unguarded, and tolerant relationship with the other side, until then considered the enemy.
Notwithstanding, dialogue still supposes the existence of two opposed parties seeking an understanding. To the measure that this understanding is established, the term loses its utility. In the present phase of ecumenism, the word dialogue for the most part is being replaced by "communion," with the aim of signifying that the obstacles in the way of establishing a universal religion are being overcome.
Because the word "ecumenism" encompasses the whole range of conciliar maneuvers of adaptation to the false religions - and not just the first phase - this work will give precedence to this term over the word "dialogue" in the study of the spirit of Vatican II and the plan to destroy the former position of the Holy Church as sole guardian of the treasures of Revelation.
How do secularization and ecumenism express the animus delendi, the progressivist desire to destroy the Holy Catholic Church?
They do so in their very foundations, their means, and their ends.
Secularization, in its foundations, supposes abolishing the civilizing missionary action of the Catholic Church, that is, the radiation of her divine mission in the temporal sphere in her efforts to evangelize the entire world (Mk 16:15). Further, the explicit or implicit admission of the philosophical principles of Enlightenment and the "religious" principles of Deism implies the denial of the integrity of the Faith and the Perennial Philosophy of the Church.
In its means, conciliar secularization denies or destroys the formerly prudent and reserved position of the Church toward the world. In its stead, it introduced a lack of vigilance and a tolerance that are opposed to the militant character of the Catholic Church.
In its ends, with the marriage of the Church and the ideals of the modern world, secularization assumes the same humanist goals that fostered revolutionary chimeras aimed at depriving God of glory on this earth, the specific end of our Religion.
With regard to ecumenism, one can see that it follows an analogous pattern.
In its foundations, when it admits the existence of sanctifying grace in other religions and recognizes them as a means to attain eternal salvation, it denies the divine foundations of the Holy Church, established as the sole intermediary institution between God and man and the exclusive heir to the treasures of Revelation. Further, by claiming that the Catholic Faith could somehow benefit from dialogue with the false religions, ecumenism destroys the unity of the Faith and, as a consequence, the permanent character of dogma.
In its means, conciliar ecumenism abolishes the traditional Catholic missionary action that strives to convert Schismatics, heretics, Jews, and pagans. It also destroys the militant character of the Church, which considers the followers of false religions enemies of the Catholic name.
In its ends, finally, ecumenism clashes with the objectives of the Holy Catholic Church, which are to reflect the glory of God and to offer men eternal salvation. According to the ecumenical thinking, however, the glory of God would no longer be reflected in the Catholic Church, but in a strange amalgam of confessions that would make up a universal religion, a pantheon of all the idols.
Demonstrating these points constitutes the principal objective of the book
Animus Delendi - II.
Atila Sinke Guimarães
For past columns by Atila in his column "On the BattleLine", see www.DailyCatholic.org/2002bat.htm Archives