One of the major problems facing the world is the 'East-West' socio-economic and political conflict. Mankind cannot be united until this is resolved. Where the traditional Church prayed for the conversion of Russia, the new Church encourages, nay embraces, Socialist values within her own bosom. Where the one said that no Catholic could co-operate in any way with Socialism, the other proclaims the redeeming values of this system. The change came in John XXIII's Pacem and Terris 'all men are equal by reason of their natural dignity'. This being so he added, 'all political communities are of equal natural dignity since they are bodies whose membership is made up of these same human beings.' Vatican II followed this up by teaching that the Church 'is bound to no particular form of Human culture, nor to any political or economic or social system.' Lest the faithful be left in doubt about this new attitude towards Communism, the Council further noted that 'The Church further recognizes that worthy elements are found in today's social movements, especially in an evolution towards unity, a process of wholesome socialization and of the association in civic and economic realms.' As John XXIII said 'the Church is not a dam against communism. the Church cannot and should not be against anything...' It will be argued that all this is not a full endorsement of Communism. But it must be considered in the light of the fact that the Council refused, despite the request of over 400 Council Fathers, to condemn Communism in any form.
At no time has the new Church spoken out against Communism as such. It occasionally condemns its excesses, but never its principles. This new attitude is part of the Teilhardian dream of combining 'the rational force of Marxism' with the 'human warmth of Christianity', and the Council, following this clue in stating that 'through her [the Church's] individual members and her whole community, the Church believes she can contribute greatly towards making the family of man and its history more human.'
Forgotten in all this is the paradigm of the Prodigal. It was not the Father's function to join the wayward son, but for the latter to return to the bosom of the Father. It is better to live in the forecourts of the Lord than to dwell in the tents of the ungodly .
We are now in a position to understand the real nature of the Ecumenical movement. Given the premise that all men have an equal natural dignity because they are united to Christ for all time; that all men are redeemed and that Religious Liberty and the use of private judgment in religious matters is his right, it surely follows that all men have equal access to the truth - or more precisely, possess it in an equal degree. Given the fact that the Church no longer believes she has the fullness of the truth; that she has lost her unity and that this unity can only be regained when all men are gathered together in the People of God, and that it is her desire to be of service and fellowship to the world, it surely follows that she must see her primary function and internal nature as one of fostering this unity - first of all among Christians, then among believers, and finally among all men. How else can the post-Conciliar act than in an ecumenical manner. It is this that explains all the extraordinary actions of John Paul II with the Jews, the Lutherans, -indeed, with all the world's religions. What happened at Asissi was not an 'abuse' but an expression of the Church's 'innermost nature'. Let there be no doubt about this. As John Paul II told the non-Catholic delegates at his inauguration: 'tell those whom you represent that the involvement of the Catholic Church in the Ecumenical movement, as solemnly expressed by the Second Vatican Council, is irreversible.'
Such of course involves the abandonment of any strict adherence to Catholic teaching. Paul VI had already told us that 'exigencies of charity often force us to go outside the bounds of orthodoxy' (Speech in Milan). John Paul went further. In talking to the seminarians at the Lateran he said that loyalty to the Church is not to be defined 'in a reduced sense as maintaining standards, nor does it mean staying within the bounds of orthodoxy - avoiding positions that are in contrast to the pronouncements of the Apostolic see, the ecumenical councils and the learned doctors of the Church...' He continued: 'we must have a divergence of positions, although in the end we must rely on a synthesis of all.' As he said elsewhere, we are to have a pluralistic Church, but it is for Rome to decide the limits of this pluralism.
With this goal in view, the Church is not only willing to give up her commitment to the true faith and sound doctrine; she is also willing to sacrifice her most precious possession, the Holy Eucharist itself. Thus she teaches that the shared Eucharist is to be the sign of this unity. John Paul II tells us in his Encyclical Redemptor Hominis that 'The Church is seeking the universal unity of Christians... and is gathering particularly today in a special way around the Eucharist and desiring that the authentic eucharistic community should become a sign of the gradually maturing unity of all Christians.' With this in mind he has himself given Communion to Anglicans and Lutherans .
So critical is this task OF UNITY that the new Church tells us that 'it has pleased God to make men holy and save them, not merely as individuals without any mutual bonds, but in making them into a single people which acknowledges Him in truth and serves Him in holiness. So from the beginning of salvation history He has chosen men not just as individuals, but as members of a certain community. This communitarian character is developed and consummated in the work of Jesus Christ... She [the church] likewise holds that in her most benign Lord and Master can be found the key, the focal point, the goal of all human history..' Yet another departure from traditional teaching. Man is declared saved, not as an individual, but as a member of the community - that is the community of the People of God. The final line is a classic piece of ambiguity. While sounding orthodox, it is a virtual quote from Teilhard de Chardin Divine Milieu.
But consider yet another point. 'Communitarian salvation, 'salvation history,' 'the 'unity' of all the people of God,' the proclaimed salvation of the atheist, and the acceptance of Socialism. Are we not once again brought back to the Teilhardian thesis? Are we not to be saved as members of some future socialist community? And is not God revealing his will through some kind of dialectical process in which all men will be united and joined together in the future socialist utopia? Is this the 'key,' the 'focal point,' of the new Church? Point Omega...!
Glory to the United Nations - hope of the World
And how is all this to be brought about? John XXIII instructed us that this one world community should be under 'a public authority, having world-wide power and endowed with the proper means for the attainment of its objective, which is the universal common good...' And what organization is to achieve this: According to the post-Conciliar 'popes,' it is the United Nations.
Listen to the words of Paul VI addressing this august body: 'It is your task here to proclaim the basic rights and duties of man, his dignity and liberty, and above all his religious liberty. We are conscious that you are the interpreters of all that is paramount in human wisdom. We would almost say: of its sacred character. The people turn to the United Nations as their last hope of peace and concord... The goals of the United Nations are the ideal that mankind has dreamed of in its journey through history. We would venture to call it the world's greatest hope - for it is the reflection of God's design - a design transcendent and full of love - for the progress of human society on earth; a reflection in which we can see the Gospel message, something from heaven come down to earth'.
The United Nations described as 'something from heaven come down to earth' and 'the world's greatest hope by Christ's supposed Vicar on earth. John Paul II is even more laudatory. Addressing the United Nations in 1979 he never once mentioned the name of Jesus, but clearly stated that 'the governments of the world must unite in a movement that one hopes will be progressive and continuous, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international and juridical instruments are endeavoring to create general awareness of the dignity of the human being... the right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and the right to manifest one's religion either individually or in community, in public and in private...' The United Nations declaration of Human Rights is the same as that of the French Revolution. John Paul II seems to forget that, as Cardinal Pie stated, 'the declaration of the Rights of Man are a denial of the Rights of Christ.'
It is well known that the family unit is the basic unit in every society, and that the majority of souls must sancify their lives in the married state. The Church has always taught that 'the primary end of marriage is the procretion and education of offspring, while its secondary purposes are mutual help and allaying (also translated 'as a remedy for,') concupisence. The are entirely subordinate to the former.' This principle, incorporated in Canon 1013, makes it clear that the welfare of children comes before that of the parents. Moreover, as Pius XII said, it 'has been handed down by Christian tradition, snf [it has been] repeatedly taught by the Supreme Pontiffs.' The doctrine was declared de fide by the Holy Office with the approval of Pius XII (AAS 36, 103, 1944). Now Vatican II has not only declared that the two ends of marriage are of equal significance; it has further reversed the order, listing the secondary end before the primary one. Let us look at what the change in this teaching leads to: it opens the door to artificial forms of birth control, infidelity and divorce. The traditional view demands that even the unitive ends of marriage must be sacrificed for the sake of the children The new view declares that selfishness - for it is fundamentally selfishness that disrupts both love and marriage - has the right to sacrifice the children for its goals. Couple this inversion with the oft repeated teaching of John Paul II that both partners in a marriage have equal authority and responsibilities - a direct contradiction of the teaching of St. Paul - and one in effect destroys the very basis for Christian marriage.
The Church's raison d'etre
And so we have a Church that sees its primary purpose 'the promotion of unity', a Church which sees itself as both 'the instrument of the unity of all mankind'; a Church which sees itself 'as the Sacramental sign of this unity'; A Church whose priesthood is to function primarily to bring about this unity, and a Church which envisions herself obliged to contribute towards 'making the family of man and its history more human.' It is this thrust towards the unity of mankind that belongs to 'the innermost nature of the Church', because she is, 'by her relationship with Christ, both a sacramental sign and an instrument of intimate union with God and the unity of all mankind...
It has not been possible to cover all the deviations of Vatican II. Needless to say, virtually every aspect of Church teaching and practice has been attacked. Her liturgy, her missionary activities and even marriage has come under attack. Enough has been said however to show the direction in which the new Church would lead us.
We have reviewed the teachings of Vatican II under four general headings - a new attitude towards the world; a new attitude towards herself; a new attitude towards man; and finally, a new attitude towards her own raison d'etre. We have shown that basic to the 'new orientations' of this Church are its belief in progress and evolution, and hence a need to constantly adapt itself to the world around it - a world which it admires and loves, but a world which has little use for the Church.
Given these facts, the Church had to develop a new outlook. No longer a 'perfect society', the spotless bride of Christ, no longer claiming to possess the 'fullness of the truth', she had to abdicate her role as the spiritual guide for mankind. What then was her function and her raison d'etre? She found the answer to this in 'service', in devoting herself to the task of making the history of man 'more human' and above all in fostering a new concept of world wide unity, 'the unity of the People of God.'She became a sign and sacrament of this unity which will embrace all Christians, then all believers, and finally the whole of mankind.
Having achieved an aggiornamento with the modern world, she had to bring her understanding of man into line with the Masonic Rousseauist view. No longer made in the image of God and wounded by Adam's sin, man is now raised to the dignity of the gods by being declared dignified by nature, united for all time with Christ, and redeemed without effort on his part. The Crucifixion becomes a witness to this dignity which is equal in all. But if we are all united to Christ and in fact all saved, then it follows we all have equal access to the truth. Once more we are brought back to the concept of creating a single religion where, as he instructed the seminarians at the Lateran University, 'we will have a divergence of opinions, although in the end, a synthesis of all'.
Finally, this new utopia, this new humanism which the Church endorses and wishes to foster, will be a socialist paradise, in which all men will be brothers, equal and free. It is for this end that the Council instructs her priests to wipe away every source of discord - be it racial, sexual or even religious. With the help of the United Nations, we are on the progressive march to this Utopia, but we have forgotten the way to Heaven. Point omega is around the corner.
Forgotten the way to Heaven! But that is what the Church is all about. That is why Christ was born and that is why he suffered on the Cross.
CHAPTER X, part 10
FOOTNOTES to CHAPTER X
(1) Hubert Jedin, Ecumenical Councils of the Catholic Church, Herder: N.Y., 1960. Ecumenical Councils are also called General Councils. The Church has never formally defined what an ecumenical council is. Philip Hughes states that 'the general council is a purely human arrangement whereby a divinely founded institution functions in a particular way for a particular purpose' (History of General Councils).
(2) These Protestant 'observers' took an active part in the proceedings behind the scenes. Even their very presence must have had an inhibiting effect on the Council Fathers. This was very significant with regard to Russian Orthodox observers from Moscow who only came with the understanding that Communism would not be condemned - a fact reported by several authors and documented by Jean Madiran in Itineraires (Cf. The Vatican-Moscow Agreement by Jean Madiran in The Fatima Crusader, (Constable, N.Y.)Issue 16, Sept-Oct., 1984.
(3) Every time the orthodox fathers wished to define more clearly what was being ambiguously stated, they were informed that the Council was 'pastoral' and not 'dogmatic' (J'acuse le Council by Arch. Lefebvre). However to state that what is 'pastoral' is not 'dogmatic' is like stating that clinical medicine is not based on scientific 'fact'. Pope Paul himself is witness to this statement. In a General Audience (1975) he stated that Vatican II 'differing from other Councils, this one was not directly dogmatic but doctrinal and pastoral'. In his Lenten address in 1976 he stated that the Council 'had perfected the doctrine of the Church to such an extent as not to leave any hesitation about the identity of her theological mystery.' The only place where the meaning of 'pastoral' is clearly defined is in the Letter to the Presidents of the National councils of Bishops concerning Eucharistic prayers. 'the reason why such a variety of texts has been offered and the end result such new formularies were meant to achieve are pastoral in nature: namely to reflect the unity and diversity of liturgical prayer. By using the various texts contained in the new Roman Missal, various Christian communities, as they gather together to celebrate the Eucharist, are able to sense that they themselves form the one Church, praying with the same faith, using the same prayer.' In other words, the pastoral intent of the documents was to facilitate and foster that ecumenism - that false unity - which the post-Conciliar Church considers its 'internal mission'.
(4) Requests by hundreds of Council Fathers for the condemnation of Communism -certainly the principal error of our times - were sidetracked by those in control - in clear violation of the Council's own rules of order - as reported by Father Ralph Wiltgen (The Rhine Flows into the Tiber) and others.
(5) In a similar manner Santiago Carrillo, head of the Spanish Communist Party, called it 'Euro-communism', 'our Aggiornamento, our Vatican II.' (Itineraires, May 1977).
(6) Ursula Oxfort, The Heresy of John XXIII, Privately published and available from her. Cf. my review in Studies in Comparative Religion (Middlesex, Eng.): Comments on a Recent 'Traditional' Catholic Book, Vol 17, 1988. Peter Hebblewaithe in his biography of John XXIII tells us that the Council was planned well in advance and that no 'spirit' other than Modernism was involved.(N.Y.: Doubleday, 1985).
(7) Pbro. Dr. Joaquin Saenz y Arriaga, Sede Vacante - Paulo VI no es legitimo Papa, Angel Urraze: Mexico, 1973.
(8) Quoted by Dietrich Von Hilderbrand, Belief and Obedience: The Critical Difference, Triumph, March 1970.
(9) Michael Davies, Archbishop Lefebvre and Religious Liberty, TAN: Ill, 1980. Xavier da Silveira in Brazil holds to a similar position.
(10) Quoted in L'heresie concilaire by Marcel De Corte, Itinieres, July-August, 1976. The statement is contained in a letter from Paul VI to Arch. Lefebvre dated June 29, 1976.
(11) Epistle Cum te to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, 11 Oct, 1976, published in Notitiae, No. 12, 1976.
(12) The reader is referred to Chapter II for the meaning and weight of some of these terms.
(13) Redemptor Hominis and Speech to the Sacred College reported in Documentation Catholique (Paris), 1975, pp. 1002-3.
(14) Speech to the Bishops of France at Issy-les-Moulineaux, L'Osservatore Romano, 3.6.80.
(15) Strictly speaking, he 'pope' and only the pope has the magisterial authority to determine what is and isn't traditional.
(16) Conservative Novus Ordo Catholics are forced to draw lines between obedience to tradition and obedience to the 'new orientations' established by the post-Conciliar 'popes'. Those who reject the authority of these 'popes' adhere to the teaching of the traditional Church and thus avoid the trap of picking and choosing just what is and isn't traditional.
(17) Two translations are available in English. Neither carries a Nihil Obstat and neither is considered 'official'. 1) Walter M. Abbott, S.J., The Documents of Vatican II, America Press: N.Y., 1966 and 2) Rev. J.L. Gonzales, The Sixteen Documents of Vatican II, Daughters of St. Paul: Boston 1967. There is not much to choose between them, though the commentaries are different. Quotations in the body of this text are taken from the first.
(18) Consider the following conciliar statement: 'The widespread reduction of working hours, for instance, brings increasing advantages to numerous people. May these leisure hours be properly used for relaxation of spirit and the strengthening of mental and bodily health. Such benefits are available through spontaneous study and activity and through travel, which refines human qualities and enriches man with mutual understanding. These can help to preserve emotional balance, even at the community level, and to establish fraternal relations among men of all conditions, nations and races.' This from a document of an Ecumenical Council!
(19) Quoted by Rev. Ralph M. Wiltgen, The Rhine flows into the Tiber, Hawthorn: N.N, 1967; Augustine: Devon, 1978.
(20) Documentation Catholique, 1775, p. 1002.
(21) Michael Davies, Pope John's Council, Augustine: Devon, 1977.
(22) Joseph M. Becker, S.J., The Re-formed Jesuits, Ignatius Press, Calif., 1992.
(23) In essence, this allowed those who had captured the Council to control what information was given out to the public.
(24) Bishop Lucey of Cor and Ross in Ireland made these comments in the Catholic Standard (Dublin), Sept. 14, 1973.
(25) Cardinal J. Heenan, A Crown of Thorns, London, 1974.
(26) Brian Kaizer, Pope Council and World, Macmillan: N.Y., 1963. Brian Kaizer was the New York Times Correspondent to the Council. The 'Northern Alliance' consisted of those European theologians who had for a long time been waging a total war against tradition'. As Cardinal Heenan noted: 'it is quite clear that the English-speaking bishops were quite unprepared for the kind of Council the rest of the northern Europeans were planning. The Americans were even less prepared than the British' (source, No. 25).
(27) As E. E. Y. Hales says: 'On the face of it Pope John was allowing the Council to take shape in a way that seemed certain not to produce the Aggiornamento of the Church which he wanted. One explanation of this paradox is that he was subtly allowing the Curia to think that it was going to be their council, so as to ensure that they would not try to thwart it, while he himself knew very well that once it met, it would cease to be theirs, that he [and it] would take over the Curia' (Pope John and His Revolution, Doubleday: N.Y. 1965). Archbishop Lefebvre describes how 'a fortnight after the opening of the Council, not a single one of these carefully prepared schemas remained', and how lists of candidates for the various commissions were prepared and circulated for voting on - men whose names nobody knew: those who prepared the lists knew these bishops very well: they were (I don't need to tell you) all of the same tendency' (A Bishop Speaks, Scottish Una Voce: Edinburgh). Michael Davies reports much the same (Pope John's Council, op. cit.)
(28) Henri Fesquet, The Drama of Vatican II, N.Y.: Random House, 1967.
(29) He watched the entire affair on private television. Examples of his intervention against the established rules of the Council to promote the 'revolution' are given in Chapter IX.
(30) Cardinal Ottaviani, an aged and senior member of the Curia, almost blind, was cut off in the middle of his speech after ten minutes by disconnecting the microphone. The response of the Fathers to his embarrassment was to clap with joy. The ancient Cardinal retired in tears. So much for the Christian charity of these 'Fathers'.
(31) Archbishop Lefebvre's J'Accuse le Councile documents a letter sent to Paul VI complaining about these tactics and signed by several cardinals and Superior Generals of Religious Organizations, and the manner in which he dismissedtheir contentions.
(32) J. Moorman, Vatican Observed, London, 1967.
(33) 'Salvation History', one of the favorite phrases of the innovators, and one clearly implying that Salvation is a istorical process, is particular offensive. Salvation is an 'individual' process. Further, in accord with the Gospel story of the eleventh-hour laborer, salvation today is no different than it was in the days of Abraham. As opposed to this, Karl Rahner defines Salvation in his Theological Dictionary Herder: N.Y., 1965, (which carries a Nihil Obstat and an Imprimatur) in these terms: 'it does not primarily signify an 'objective; achievement, but rather a 'subjective' existential healing and fulfillment'. He defines 'Saving history' as 'a general term signifying the fact that god, on account of his universal salvific will, has graciously embraced the whole of human history and in it has offered all men his salvation, and that his grace and justification have been concretely and historically realized in humanity... This concept is based on the theological presupposition not only that man has to hope for and accept grace within history, but that grace itself is historical and that history itself, with all that it involves - for instance - the unity of mankind - is grace'.
(34) Quoted in H. Fesquet, Le Journal du Councile, Morel: Paris, 1964
(35) John T. McGinn, Doctrines do Grow, Paulist: N.Y., 1972.
(36) Avery Dulles, S.J. has said, 'without using the term 'continuing revelation', Vatican II allowed for something of the kind.' Donald Campion, S.J. has said with regard to the Constitution on the Church Today, 'here as elsewhere, it is easy to recognize the compatibility of insights developed by thinkers (sic) such as Teilhard de Chardin in his Divine Milieu with the fundamental outlook of the Council.' (Both were conciliar periti and quotes are from commentaries in the Abbott translation.) For an excellent study regarding the Teilhardian influence, the reader is referred to Wolfgang Smith, Teilhardism and the New Religion, TAN: Ill, 1988.
(37) Commentary in the Abbott translation.
(38) Giancarlo Zizola, The Utopia of John XXIII, Orbis: Maryknoll, N.Y., 1978.
(39) There are of course others who see it as a new Crucifixion.
(40) Commentary in the Abbott translation of the Documents.
(41) Father Gustavo Guiterrez, the Peruvian Liberation 'Theologian' goes so far as to say that Marxists will be saved, but not so Christians who fail to join in with the forces of history (i.e., who do not become revolutionary).
(42) That all men will be saved in the end.
(43) 'Passive' participation - as for example, attending a Protestant wedding - was allowed. But actively joining in the service was forbidden.
(44) 'Bear not 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).
(45) Permission to read any book on the Index was readily obtained providing one had an adequate reason to do so.
(46) Quoted in Werner Keller, Diaspora, N.Y.: Harcort, 1969.
(47) Listen to St. Athanasius speaking about the Arian Councils of the Fourth Century: 'the whole world was put into confusion, and those who at the time bore the profession of clergy ran far and near, seeking how best to learn to believe in our Lord Jesus Christ... if they were believers already, they would not have been seeking, as thought they were not... no small scandal... that Christians, as if waking out of sleep at this time of day, should be inquiring how they were to believe... while their professed clergy, though claiming deference from their flocks as teachers, were unbelievers on their own showing, in that they were seeking what they had not... What defect of teaching was there for religious truth in the Catholic church that they should enquire concerning faith now, and should fix this year's date to their profession of faith...'
(48) Light on the Ancient Worlds, Perennial: Middlesex, Eng., 1965.
(49) Sources for quotes in this paragraph are to be found in Louis-Marie de Blignieres, John Paul II and Catholic Doctrine, Society of Pius V, Oyster Bay Cove:NY. This remarkable text fully substantiates this teaching on the part of John Paul II.
(50) This is the probably explanation of he mistranslating of Multis by all in the Novus Ordo Missae.
(51) There are areas of course, where an individual should use his private judgment. See Chapter II for a full discussion.
(52) Pope Gregory XVI called this 'insanity', Pius IX in his Encyclical Quanta Cura, a document whose magisterial intent is made clear by the fact that he initiates it with the statement 'By Our Apostolic Authority We reject, proscribe and condemn...' had this to say: 'Against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert 'that the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require. From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster the erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an insanity, viz, that liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare their ideas whatever either by word of mouth, by the press or in any other way.''
(53) It is of interest to quote the comments of Cardinal Siri on this novel teaching of the Council: 'Let us speak not against liberty but against the abuses of liberty. Liberty involves the possibility of sinning, but it in no way implies God's approval or even tolerance of sin. In several places the schema claims liberty for all religious communities, even those that are estranged from the natural law and are contrary to good human morals. We cannot legitimitize what god merely tolerates; we can only tolerate it, and that within the limits of the common good. We cannot therefore accept the proposed schema, insofar as it recommends liberty for all without discrimination... We should consider more carefully the contribution of theological sources to this problem of religious liberty and determine whether or not the contents of this schema can be reconciled with the teachings of Leo XIII, Pius XI, and Pius XII. Otherwise, we weaken our own authority and compromise our apostolic effort.' (Henri Fesquet, The Drama of Vatican II, N.Y.: Random House, 1967).
(54) The Communists were delighted. The Communist Weekly in Rome headlined the statement under the caption of 'No more crusades'. Il Borghese, another Roman paper was more prescient. It stated that 'this policy means the end of la chiesa cattolica romana'.
(55) Pope Pius IX in 1846 called Communism 'absolutely contrary to the natural law itself...' and added that 'once adopted, would utterly destroy the rights, property and possessions of all men, and even of society itself.' Leo XIII in 1878 called it 'a mortal plague which insinuates itself into the very marrow of human society only to bring about its ruin'. Pius XI in 1937 called it 'a pseudo-ideal of justice, of equality and of fraternity...' and further stated that 'Communism is intrinsically evil, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever.'
(56) 'In those days went there out of Israel wicked men, who persuaded many, saying, let us go and make a covenant with the heathen that are round about us: for since we departed from them, we have had much sorrow. Then certain people were so forward therein, that they went to the King who gave them licence to do after the ordinances of the heathen... [and they] made themselves uncircumcised and forsook the holy covenant, and joined themselves to the heathen...' Let him who has ears, hear.
(57) Cf. Introibo, No. 43, Jan-Mar, 1984, l'Association sacerdotal Noel Pinot, Angers, France.
(58) Cardinal Vaughan spoke to this when he said: 'Tarry not for Corporate Reunion. It is a dream, and a snare off the Evil One. We have all to be converted to God individually; to learn of Christ, to be meek and humble of heart individually; to take up our Cross and follow Him individually, each according to his personal grace. The individual may no more wait for Corporate Reunion than he may wait for Corporate Conversion...' J.G. Snead-Cox, Cardinal Vaughan Vol II, Herder, St. Louis 1910.
(59) If parents don't get along they can now apply to the Rota for a divorce on 'psychological grounds'.