TRADITIO Traditional Roman Catholic Internet Site   
  E-mail List: traditio@traditio.com, Web Page: http://www.traditio.com
 Copyright 1998 Remant.  Reproduction prohibited without authorization.


WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE COUNTERREVOLUTION?
By Michael J. Matt

[Reprinted with permission from The Remnant, November 3, 1998 (XXXI:18).]


While  confirming the  good based  on the  liturgical reform wished  by the
Second Vatican  Council and  initiated by Pope  Paul VI, the  Church grants
also a sign of understanding to those persons "attached to certain previous
liturgical and disciplinary forms" (motu proprio, Ecclesia Dei, n.5). It is
in this perspective that one must read and apply the motu proprio, Ecclesia
Dei :  I desire  that everything  may happen  in the  spirit of  the Second
Vatican Council, in full harmony with Tradition, aiming at unity in charity
and loyalty to the Truth.

  --Pope John Paul II, in a discourse to members of the Priestly Fraternity
     of St. Peter on the occasion of the Tenth Anniversary of Ecclesia Dei.
                                                        Rome, October 1998.


               A funny thing happened on the way to the font

Last  week my  sister and her  husband announced  the birth of  their tenth
child,  a happy and  joyful event to  be sure.  It was decided  that little
Gregory’s  baptism would be  held immediately  after the 11:30  Indult Mass
here  in St.  Paul at  St. Augustine’s  Church. Becoming  an uncle  for the
"thirty-somethingth" time  doesn’t happen  every day, and so  I, of course,
was in attendance for the little fellow’s baptism.

My first clue that something was wrong, however, came when our pastor asked
the congregating  Matt family to gather  at the front of  the Church rather
than  at  the usual  place  near  the back.  Everything became  immediately
clearer.  What? No  exorcism?  No procession  down the  center  aisle while
reciting the Apostles’ Creed? No Latin? What happened?

Then  I  remembered—that’s  right,   the  Ordinary  of  the  St.  Paul  and
Minneapolis Archdiocese, Archbishop Harry  Flynn, had taken it upon himself
last Spring to order that all Traditional Sacramental rites be deleted from
St. Augustine’s list of  Indult "privileges." So, for the first time in ten
years, Novus Ordo Baptisms, Novus Ordo Nuptial Masses, Novus Ordo Funerals,
etc., would  become the norm without exception  for the parishioners at St.
Augustine’s Latin  Mass community. Our pastor,  Father Zweber, did his best
to prevent  "passage of the act,"  but what could he  really do? After all,
the Archbishop had spoken.

My sister, Joan, and  her husband, Joseph, had reacted to the news with far
more  concern  than the  rest  because,  at the  time  of the  Archbishop’s
decision, Joan  was pregnant with  Gregory—she knew that her  baby would be
the first child in  the Matt family baptized according to the New Rite. She
wrote  back and  forth  to the  Ecclesia Dei  Commission  in Rome,  but, of
course, to  no avail. "The new  Rite of Baptism is  perfect and good; don’t
quibble over old vs. new rites. Think, rather, about how wonderful it is to
be baptized,"  she was told. As is the case  with everyone these days, Joan
and  Joe   expected  (and  received)  no   sympathy  from  the  Commission.

You  want to  talk about  an odd  feeling! There  I sat  in my  little pew,
holding  in my hand  a little book,  which read:  "New Rite of  Baptism." I
recalled how,  for thirty  years, my father  had sacrificed everything—even
Mass attendance  in the  Latin Rite, when  he took refuge  in the Ukrainian
Rite for a time—to  avoid subjecting his family to the Novus Ordo. But now,
ten years after the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei, here we sat preparing to bow
in defeat  to the victor. Modernism  had won out. After  all, what could we
do? Mustn’t  object, our fellow  Traditionalists told us, lest  we risk the
loss of our Indult Mass. I was grateful that my father was not present that
day.

All at  once and  before I could help  it, I found myself  blurting out, in
perfectly audible voice and  right in the middle of the baptism, that which
I  figured  everyone  must  be thinking:  "Well,  we’ve  become Novus  Ordo
Catholics, just  as Archbishop Lefebvre predicted.  They’ve finally brought
us into the fold."

Rather than risk creating  another scene like that one, I removed myself to
the back  of the Church and  waited for the ceremony  to come to a merciful
end. After all, it’s Baptism; at least it’s valid.

My poor  sister practically wept after  the service. "What are  we going to
do?" she  pleaded, "They’ve taken away what little  we had." She had fought
hard, but she lost,  and it was heartbreaking for her. She has ten children
which she must raise as Traditional Catholics, without parish life, without
most  of   the  Sacraments,  with  precious   little  Traditional  Catholic
"support." What’s she to  do? I guess Flynn and company would have her take
her brood  and retreat into the  Society of St. Pius  X, for, obviously, no
accommodations  are in  the  works for  her "rightful  aspirations"  at the
Indult parish. After all, they’ve given her the Mass.... What more does she
want?  The  Establishment  simply  says  to  people like  my  sister,  "Our
Sacraments are perfectly valid.... Get over yourself!"

"Mike, what  are we  going to do?"  Joan asked. I couldn’t  answer her. The
only thing  of which I was  certain was that when  my next child comes into
this world, his Baptism will happen in my home or, privately, in the chapel
of some priest friend who knows what all of this actually means.

Well, folks, at least here in St. Paul, it’s beginning—they’re transforming
the late Archbishop Lefebvre into a prophet. He predicted this would happen
way  back in  1988.  What else  can I  say? If  I am  to remain  a faithful
"indulter," my  children will  be baptized in  the New Rite  sans exorcism,
they will receive the new abominable rite of Confirmation from the likes of
Archbishop Weakland  or Cardinal  Mahony, they will  be married with  a New
Mass after having been  ordered to attend the sickening pre-Cana classes, I
will receive  the "blessing of the  sick" months before I’m  actually on my
deathbed,  I  will receive   viaticum from  a  nun or  from some  wandering
homosexual, and  I will be buried without a Requiem  Mass. But cheer up: at
least I  will be canonized at my New Ordo  Rite of Christian Burial.... All
is not lost, you can pray to me after I pass on. In all seriousness, we can
no longer  live the life of Traditional Catholics  here in St. Paul’s Latin
Mass Community. What do you suggest we do?


                              Victory is Ours

Shortly  after Gregory’s rather  unsettling baptism,  I read in  a Catholic
publication  that we  Traditionalists  are "winning"  the war.  I  was most
"relieved!"   Apparently,  the   Church   will  soon   have  a   place  for
Traditionalism,  just as  she  has a  place for  other  Rites in  her grand
ecumenical embrace.  I wondered what  all that meant, but,  man, it sounded
pretty good. Don’t you think?

Apparently, we have a hundred "approved" Indult Masses being offered in our
country now—that’s  up to  one percent of  one percent of  all Masses being
offered.  I guess  when  you’re old  or when  you  have no  children, these
statistics give  you quite a charge. I, however,  have two babies to raise,
and I have no  idea how anyone could classify what my wife and I face every
day in  our archdiocese as a "winning" proposition.  We don’t even have the
slightest vestige of parish life. We’ve never known what it is like to have
daily Mass. We’re outcasts  who shuffle into our Indult parish every Sunday
like lepers  from the colony. We have no  spiritual home there, despite the
kindness of our pastor,  who truly enjoys offering the Tridentine Mass. The
situation in the Church is only growing steadily worse.

Anyway,  the optimists  among  us tell  us we’re  winning. While  they busy
themselves counting up Indult Masses and slinging mud at "Lefebvrists" in a
peculiar effort to make  themselves sound oh-so-centrist, we’re supposed to
be convinced that Modernism’s progress has somehow been impeded by the fact
that we have access to the Mass we like.

I grew  up in this movement,  and, yet, I feel like  a stranger in it these
days. I  hear sentiments expressed today that  leave me wholly baffled. I’m
told not to "criticize  the New Mass," but rather to congratulate myself on
how "beautiful the old  one is." I still flinch each time I’m admonished to
proclaim my indebtedness to our Modernist bishops for "allowing" that which
was never  outlawed in the first place, and that  for which the Pope called
for wide  and generous application of  anyway. When a few  bishops obey the
Pope and  grant permission for an  Indult Mass, I am  seriously expected to
fall to  my knees and gush,  "Thank you, Your Excellencies,  we will now be
your adoring  lap dogs. You can  count on our support."  I’m experiencing a
bit of difficulty playing that part!

What  is all  of  this? What  have we  become?  In the  last ten  years, no
admission of  guilt was ever offered by the  Modernists; no ground was ever
relinquished. They never made any overtures to restore the Church they have
expertly ravaged;  in fact,  they’re still running "full  steam ahead" with
that agenda!  A few bishops "permit"  an old Mass, which  they control, and
which they relegate to bad neighborhoods many times, or on Saturday nights,
late  on Sundays,  or  even only  once a  month in  some cities,  and we’re
expected to lay down  our arms and throw a party? It seems that many of our
shepherds are  having a  little fun at  our expense, but can  we still call
this "winning"? Is banishing  Catholic public outrage at the abomination of
desolation  really the  best option?  Is  The Remnant the  only Traditional
Catholic apostolate that is wholly baffled by this novel strategy?

I  repeat:  I  no longer  am  at  home in  what  purports  to be  America’s
mainstream Traditional  Catholic movement.  It seems to have  become a club
for compliant  Gregorian Chant aficionados and  liturgy buffs—and I confess
to  being neither  of these. I  can understand  that little old  ladies and
kindly old  men—battle-wearied and tired from  fighting for the last thirty
years—would  find solace in  this variety  of "winning," but,  for Heaven’s
sake, where are  the men? Where’s the outrage of  folks my age? Under which
rock   has   virulent   anti-Modernism   crawled   within   Traditionalism?
Fine-smelling  incense, great  vestments, splendidly  performed chant....Is
that  what   we’re  all  about  now?   With  all  due  respect,  mainstream
Traditionalism in  America "ain’t no Rising in  the Vendée," and that’s for
dang sure!

Over  the past  few  years, has  some weird  consensus been  struck between
bishops and  centrist Traditionalists stating that  the only real hindrance
standing in the way  of unity between those who "prefer" the Latin Mass and
the Modernist Establishment is the "extremists"—you know, The Remnant, that
"schismatic"   Society  of   St.  Pius   X,  those   lunatic  "independent"
chapels...all those  who refuse to comply with this  odd flag of truce that
has been hoisted, astonishingly enough, in the heat of battle?

As we  have said a thousand times before, we  are not lambasting the Indult
Mass  itself, which  would be  tantamount to  sacrilege, since  the "Indult
Mass" is  still just  a Tridentine Mass.  How can we  criticize our beloved
Mass  just because  someone  gave it  a goofy  new  label? We  are, rather,
floored  by the  compliant  reaction to  this Indult  on the parts  of some
Traditionalists. We  at  The Remnant have  attended an Indult  Mass for ten
years without  ever compromising one iota of  our resolve to the Modernists
in order to protect  "our Mass." In fact, The Remnant is more outspoken now
perhaps than  it ever was. I  don’t think you can blame  the Indult Mass on
the fact  that a  significant number in  our own ranks  have "swallowed the
Council  in  order to  have  the  Mass," as  Abbé  de Nantes  put it.  This
breakdown is our fault!

Some readers of The Remnant will no doubt be surprised to learn that a call
has actually been put out by duped Traditionalists for a unilateral boycott
of apostolates  like ours. Why? Because of  The Remnant’s refusal to become
bed partners with Cardinal  Mahony and the rest of the ecclesiastical "good
ol’ boys" in this country in exchange for the Indult Mass.

"You extremists just don’t get it," they shout at us. "You fail to see that
by concentrating  on the goodness of the  old Mass, rather than criticizing
the new  Mass, we  will win friends in  high places (even in  Rome), and we
will  be allowed  to exist with  all the  other ‘faith communities’  in the
Church today."  They resent  The Remnant  for its "peculiar"  propensity to
call a spade a  spade and to regard the new Mass as the abomination that it
truly is!

The Remnant has no interest in "making friends" with the
Modernist-controlled Establishment  in order to preserve  "our" Mass or for
any other reason. Does  this shock you? If so, then we must ask the natural
follow-up   question:   Have   you   ever  actually     read    Pascendi  ?

The Remnant , which for thirty-one years has been  at the forefront of this
fight, is  now seen  as "extremist" and "reactionary"  and "troublesome" by
what  we might  call  the new  breed Traditionalists.  The  Remnant advises
caution  and  preaches  refusal  to comply  with  Modernism,  and for  this
"transgression" it’s  targeted by its own.  "Let’s cancel our subscriptions
to  The Remnant," they write , "and let’s encourage  everyone we know to do
the same"—I’ve  actually read  this kind of  back-stabbing rot with  my own
eyes.  It’s the  strategy of  lightweight little  fellows who  "prefer" the
"old" Latin Mass. Richard Rich keeps popping up in my mind’s eye whenever I
consider men such as  these. Cromwell’s spiritual children need pawns, and,
the Traditionalist  movement is no longer  lacking in Richard Rich-types to
play the part of "informant."

What  calls  itself  "mainstream"  Traditionalism today  is  fast  becoming
centrist conciliarism that is marked by a genuine "attachment" to old Latin
liturgies. That’s all. Our new "friends" are at the center, and they insist
on lambasting those who  stay to the right, where Traditionalism has always
been. They  spend a  lot of time talking  about winning; they go  on and on
about  uniting   and  about  finally  gaining   respectability  within  the
Establishment.  They wax  oh-so-eloquent  about a  "sane" and  "reasonable"
approach to  Traditionalism which  the Modernists will not  mock. They brag
about  newly-discovered  Traditional   intellectualism  that  will  finally
command the approval of  the Modernists. They strike out for the moral high
ground by  chastising "Lefebvrists" and by  ridiculing the late Archbishop,
whom  they never even  met and who  now has  become the favorite  piñata on
their web  sites and silly little  newsletters. This is "Traditionalism" in
1998   and,   believe   me,   Your  Excellency,   it’s   "Lefebvrist-free!"

You  remember  Braveheart ?  William  Wallace was  betrayed  by his  own—by
compromising  Scottish  nobles  who hadn’t  the  guts  for his  "fanatical"
conviction. Well, look out, my friends, we have our own "nobles" who are at
it again  in the ranks  of the Catholic counterrevolution.  Be careful whom
you trust!

But, poor  fellows, perhaps we’re  too hard on them.  They’re misguided men
who fail  to see that if  the Modernists do not mock  us, then we no longer
pose a threat to them. If they pretend to take us "seriously," then we have
complied in  some way  with Modernism’s agenda.  If we gain  their respect,
then we have betrayed the Cause and have become their useful idiots. If our
"intellectualism"  is held  in  high esteem  by  them, then  it has  become
tainted by  their errors,  and they find  little in it  to fear. Modernists
will "respect" Catholic "intellectualism"  only when they see it as capable
of being honed to  fit their grand agenda; i.e., the "reform of the reform"
brand  of centrism  is taken  "very seriously" (...wink...  wink,...) these
days by Modernists.


                        Traditionalism Democratized

New Traditionalism  in America has been—in  a very real sense—democratized.
We see ourselves as  Catholics who have "rights"—we have the "right" to the
Mass which we prefer—especially if we agree to refrain from criticizing the
Mass others  prefer. This is the  American way. This is  also classic phony
ecumenism. "We only ask for our right to coexist with the rest in the Novus
Ordo; we  will not question anyone  or anything...including, obviously, the
whole New  Order itself." And, to get  our "special interest" recognized by
the powers  that be, we will organize ourselves  into lobby groups, we will
hold fund  raisers, and we will  conduct polls to prove  that a significant
number of the "electorate"  wants the "old" Mass, and so their "inalienable
rights" must  be respected. I’m not  making this stuff up—they  admit it to
whomever will listen!

These are  the poor, misguided and  democratized Traditionalists; they have
been hoodwinked  into believing  that Modernists somehow  inadvertently and
quite by  accident stomped the Traditional Faith  into the ground, and that
if only  Traditionalists can  articulate their "reasonable"  positions more
clearly and more diplomatically, the Modernist commandants will give us all
a fair hearing. They have failed to recognize that Modernists hate Catholic
Tradition  and everything for  which the  Catholic Church once  stood. They
despise the  old Mass  because it represents prayer,  sacrifice and worship
that grew  out of simple Faith—something, it would  seem, most of them lost
years ago. The only  way that Modernists will tolerate the Traditional Mass
is   according   to   conditions    which   will   cripple   the   Catholic
counterrevolution  and, thus,  remove  any blockade  from the  path  of the
wrecking  machine which  is ramming  the walls  and the foundations  of the
Church  into  dust. They’ll  give  permission for  its  use only  if it  is
understood that  it is subservient to  the Novus Ordo, and  only so long as
all Traditionalists endorse the liturgical revolution and the Spirit of the
Second Vatican Council in every regard.

Does it not seem  logical, then, for us to suggest that, if Traditionalists
attend  an "approved"  Tridentine  Mass, then  they have  an  obligation to
demonstrate  an increase  in intensity  in their full-scale  attack against
Modernism,  despite the  bishops’ papally  mandated "generosity"  where the
Indult is concerned?

There is  a tendency on  the part of many  among us to act  as though we’re
dealing  with sincere  (albeit, slightly  misled) men in  these Modernists.
Consequently we plead and beg and explain our "attachment" to the old Mass,
in the hopes that our "legitimate preferences" will one day be respected by
"legitimate  authority." We  forget  that that  "legitimate authority"  was
transformed into tyrannical power, which labored for years to eradicate the
Tridentine liturgy and the  old Faith in the first place, and which, in the
aftermath,  left our  lives, our  families, and  our parishes  in shambles.
Adding insult to injury,  some Traditionalists regard it as the better part
of  valor to  separate themselves  from those  "evil Lefebvrists"  (who are
unrelenting in  their war on Modernism, by the way)  in order to prove just
how cooperative  they can be, if only  their "rightful aspirations" will be
respected by the marauding Modernists.

Wouldn’t it be nice  if we all had a niche... a position of prominence... a
respectable  movement of  which  to be  part? Wouldn’t  it  be great  to be
winners in  the world’s  eyes? But shouldn’t Traditionalists  prepare to be
losers in  the eyes  of the world, just  as Christ was, and  to be martyred
rather  than  respected  by  that world?  We’re  not  winning unless  we’re
clinging to the Cross  upon which Christ’s Mystical Body is presently being
crucified.  If  we  grow  content  to  see  the  Traditional  liturgy  made
ecumenically  "acceptable" by  a Modernist  Establishment (as  is happening
with  the legalization  of prostitution  in the  civil realm  this election
year),  then  we have  dropped  completely  missed the  point  of what  the
Traditional Catholic counterrevolution is all about!


                           Victory Through Defeat

Tragic as it is  to admit, the human element of Christ’s divine institution
has become feebly counterproductive in the latter part of this century. Our
shepherds—to  the  horror  of  faithful  Catholics—have become  a  pack  of
pathetic  "do-nothings," featuring  among them  precious few  standouts who
will separate themselves from the herd long enough to cry out in defense of
the Church. Collegiality binds  their tongues and shackles them to inaction
and compliance.  Could it not be that the day is  at hand when, rather than
thanking them  profusely for obeying  their boss every now  and then, loyal
Catholics should begin to  respectfully rebuke their shepherds publicly for
the weaklings that most  of them have become—Indult or no? What most of our
bishops have  done to the Church in  America amounts to ecclesiastical high
treason, and  no Indult will ever change the  horrific history of the NCCB.
So they  give us  the Mass that we  likeÖso what? We as  Catholics who have
lost  family and  loved  ones in  the new  church  must recognize  a higher
calling, and we must  not be satisfied until our bishops call for an end to
the madness in the  Church, and until they fall down on their knees and beg
God’s forgiveness for what they’ve done!

I know  I am not alone  when I lament the fact that  I have no parish life;
homosexuals and  lesbians ravage  the sanctuaries of many  of our churches;
sex education  teachers rape the innocence of  our children in our Catholic
schools; we must homeschool our children, in fact, because Catholic schools
have a proven track record of destroying the Faith of our little ones; many
of  our priests  do  not believe  in the  Real Presence,  or in  the Church
teaching on  Hell, or  even in the  existence of damning sins,  etc. And my
bishop? He  couldn’t care less. He  won’t even answer our  letters. I guess
he’s  too busy  playing golf  and holding  interfaith prayer  services with
Jews.  He  doesn’t  care  if  we  all  become   sedevacantists  or  willing
participants in  the New  Order—so long as  we quit the  resistance. Are we
fanatics  when,   after  such  "shepherding,"  profuse   gratitude  to  His
Excellency for the Indult doesn’t flow too naturally from our lips?

Different  dioceses are  better or worse  than ours,  yet the image  of the
Church that  we see every  day here in St.  Paul is enough to  make a saint
lose his Faith. (Gee, I wonder if the homosexuals will have a gay "mass" at
Minneapolis’s pro-Cathedral this Halloween—they  had one there a while back
and put  pumpkins on top of the altar.)  The situation grows steadily worse
universally, while our bishops grow steadily more insignificant.

I see little  victory in the fact that I can attend  an Indult Mass so long
as I do as  the bishops do and close an eye to  the ongoing sacking of Holy
Mother Church that every  one of us witnesses every single day! My children
have been  robbed of  the old Sacraments;  my family is  alone and isolated
from  the normal  life of  the Church;  even our  best priests  cannot risk
publicly  criticizing the effects  of Vatican  II and the  whole liturgical
revolution, lest  their bishops come  down upon them with  unholy wrath and
condemn them  to ten years in  a Bingo hall. We  are strangers in a strange
land, whose "rightful aspirations" to worship according to the old Rite are
being used  to stifle our rightful  indignation against the great sacrilege
to   which   our  children   are   subjected   in  the   Church  we   love.

Is it really too much to suggest that all Tradition-minded Catholics should
consider  (as a  condition for  attending an  Indult Mass) making  a solemn
promise  to  publicly  oppose the  endless  abominations  in their  various
dioceses as  adamantly as  they can? I  don’t think this  is "extremist"—do
you? Traditional Catholics must not tolerate Modernist error! The New Order
in the  Church is a Modernist  attack against the Mystical  Body of Christ.
How can we function as members of the Church Militant, then, if we agree to
a truce with the attackers?

Are we or are  we not at war here? I will continue to attend an Indult Mass
for  the time being  (only because our  priest has  the Faith and  is truly
Catholic  in  his  heart)   but  my  outrage  against  the  antics  of  the
Establishment will only grow more pronounced. The Indult Mass is a means of
survival for  some disillusioned Catholics—it’s  not an end  in itself. The
fight for the restoration  of the Tridentine Mass has never been that. This
is just basic Traditionalism,  as defined by men of the past such as Hamish
Fraser,  Michael Davies,  Archbishop  Lefebvre, Father  Paul Crane,  Walter
Matt,  Archbishop de  Castro  Mayer, etc.,  years and  years ago.  There is
nothing new in this, and yet it is suddenly being castigated as "extremist"
by folks who sincerely believe that they are Traditional Catholics. Why? Do
they   understand   Modernism?    Are   they   afraid...afraid   of   being
losers...afraid of  being mocked? It’s  a natural reaction, but  it must be
avoided like  the plague. If, in our apocalyptic day  and age, our lives as
Catholics  suddenly  become  comfortable,  then  something  is  wrong.  The
Mystical  Body of  Christ  is being  crucified....This is  no time  for His
followers to be comfortable!

Should not  opposition to the whole New  Order be more desperately promoted
even  than gaining  access  to our  "legitimate liturgical  aspirations"? I
thought  this war  was  for souls  and  against the  New OrderÖnot  for our
personal  comfort and  peaceful coexistence  in the  new order. Why  are we
thanking  Modernists  for  their  tolerance of  our  antiquated  liturgical
"preferences"? Why  in 1998 have we raised the  white flag on exposing that
abomination called  the New  Mass? Has the  New Mass been  somehow improved
lately? The existence of  New Order priestly organizations such as Credo in
Virginia should  leave us with no  doubt that the New  Mass is only getting
much, much  worse. Even illustrious fixtures  of "conservative" Catholicism
in America,  such as  The Wanderer, are  not afraid to go  on the offensive
against  abusive  liturgies and  faithless  bishops. Why,  then, as  things
become  progressively worse,  have so  many Traditionalists agreed  to this
absurd surrender?

I know  priests who offer the  New Mass every  day, who suffer unbelievable
persecution in  the new Church  because they will not  abandon their flocks
(e.g., remember  Fr. Alfred  Kunz?) yet who  are much more  willing to wage
public war on Modernism  than a few priests I know who offer the Tridentine
Mass  exclusively.  Why  should  this be?  Because  permission  to say  the
Tridentine Mass  can not  be used by the  bishops to SHUT THEM  UP! We must
pray for  priests who  still have the Faith  today—all priests—because they
suffer a  great deal,  regardless of in  which "camp" they try  to live out
their vocation.

Speaking   of  prayer,   it   seems  obvious   to  us   that   the  weapons
Tradition-minded Catholics  must wield today can only  be ceaseless prayer,
matched in intensity by a commitment to engage in incessant Catholic action
against the enemy. The prospect of being outnumbered, or called "fanatics,"
or  losing  our  respectability,  our friends,  "our"  Mass,  and even  our
comfortable lives, should not lessen this resolve.

If we  apply great  significance to numbers,  then do we  not demonstrate a
shallow comprehension of the  times in which we live? If we think money can
conquer all, then do we really believe that this war is a spiritual one? If
we seek to be  true followers of Christ, shouldn’t we prepare to walk alone
for His  sake? Shouldn’t  we even consent  to become losers  in an apparent
lost Cause,  if our sacrifice will lead other  souls to see the abomination
of desolation rising up  before them? This is how it was in the Traditional
Catholic  movement  in  which  I grew  up.  Why  is  it  all changing  now?


                            An American Problem?

Perhaps  the  Traditional  Catholic   predicament  is  more  difficult  for
Americans  to  accept. I’ve  seen  much  less of  this  odd inclination  to
compromise among  French Traditional  Catholics, whose willingness,  by the
way, to  make a  scene for the Cause  shuts down a fairly  large section of
Paris every Pentecost weekend. In America, we’ve grown so accustomed to the
notion of  the quick  fix. We are used  to being on winning  teams. We want
instant  gratification  now...not  later. We  have  a  "right" to  personal
satisfaction.

Consequently, it seems that many of us have great difficulty accepting that
our place as Catholics living in an anti-Catholic world today is "nowhere."
We have no home. This is precisely why the temptation to become centrist is
such a real threat  to Americans—the enemy knows we’re homeless...he counts
on it,  in fact! Through the notion of  centrism, we—just like the centrist
Republicans in  American politics—are led to  believe that if we compromise
just a  little, we can become  part of a winning  endeavor, with legitimate
rights and  a respected voice,  which will be rewarded  with greater appeal
among  the  masses.  Centrism  promises a  winning  proposition  to men  of
conviction who  face an  apparent losing one.  No one likes to  be a loser,
even for Christ. No one enjoys being homeless.

The alternative to the  promised security of centrism follows a much darker
and murkier path which offers no human certainties and no guarantees—but it
is wholly  Catholic. Instead of being escorted  by Modernists in directions
they choose, we’ll be forced to desperately cling to Faith and Tradition as
we wander  in the wilderness, waiting for God to  show Himself, or at least
to raise  up the  great saint—the new  Moses—who will lead us  out from the
darkness  some  day. Centrism  and  conciliarism  are two  of the  greatest
threats Traditional Catholics face  today, because through them, we are all
promised the  hearth and home of which we were  robbed thirty years ago. If
only Traditionalists could see, however, that this promised home is no home
at all,  but rather it is an apartment  owned by Modernist landlords, whose
aim  is  to control  the  last  bastion of  opposition  against their  foul
revolution—namely, the Traditional Catholic resistance.


                          What’s the Alternative?

That these  days would dawn was foretold by Our Lady  both at Fatima and at
La Salette; we knew  they were coming. It’s easy to be a follower of Christ
when the  sun is shining. But how about now, in  these dark days? How about
when He’s  being led to the  hill of crucifixion and there  is no glory for
Him , let alone  for His followers?  How about  when His followers  have no
alternatives...no  homes...no schools...no  Masses...few priests  who still
believe? What do  we do then? Do we go dashing back  over to Pilate and try
to strike  a deal with him? In order to  appear reasonable and centrist, do
we publicly  criticize the little group of "extremists"  at the foot of the
Cross who were not  afraid to risk everything—even their lives—to walk with
Him  one last  time? Or,  do we  simply wander  along, holding fast  to the
belief that He is  the Messiah, and keeping the Faith until the dawn of the
Third Day?

Our only  hope is to keep  the old Faith, and we  do that—not by implied or
expressed consent  to declaring a  cease-fire in the war  against the Novus
Ordo—but, rather,  we accomplish this  by pledging undying fealty  to every
tenet of Traditional Catholicism, no matter how unpopular that causes us to
become. We keep the old Faith by making our children realize that martyrdom
must be  their irrevocable choice before compromise  with the enemy is even
considered. They must be weaned on an unadulterated loathing for Modernism.

I would  rather see my little boy and  girl never attend another Tridentine
Mass again in their  lives before even considering that they would ever bow
to the  legitimacy of the new  theology, the new liturgical expressions—the
new ecumenical  church. Through the grace  of God, my little  ones can save
their souls,  even without  the Mass (as  difficult as that  would be), but
once they’ve learned to  tolerate the profound errors brilliantly wedded to
the  warp  and  woof  of new  order,  it  matters  little  which Mass  they
attend—they  still  will  lose  the  Faith  when  all  is  said  and  done.

The  Traditional  Catholic  movement must  recognize  that  whether we  are
"indulters," "SSPXers,"  in "approved"  orders, or with  independents, zero
tolerance of Modernism is  our only hope to keep the old Faith alive in our
children. And if Rome laughs at us for saying this, then so be it. Faithful
Catholics are  still waiting for Rome to come back  to the Faith, and until
that  happens,  let  them  laugh.  At  least  our children  will  keep  the
Faith—something millions  and millions  of Catholics are no  longer able to
say  these days  in the new  church. The  rosary, the Catholic  family, the
scapular,  the  Tridentine Mass  wherever  and whenever  possible will  see
Christ’s  disciples   through  this  modern  vale   of  tears.  Compromise,
conciliarism and  centrism, on  the other hand,  will rip the  Faith of our
fathers from the hearts and souls of our children.

Here in  St. Paul, we’ve  already lost most of  the traditional Sacraments,
and, if  we don’t buckle under  and declare our full  acceptance of the new
order,  we will  probably  lose the  old Mass  soon  enough. But  when this
happens, our  consolation will be that not one  Modernist will ever be able
to claim  (please God)  that any of us  lost the old Faith.  They know that
even if we are forced to go elsewhere to worship, the old Faith will travel
with  us, and  it will  survive until  the end,  with God’s help.  Our hope
hinges not on the  Indult Mass (we know the Tridentine Mass can never die),
but  rather on  the survival  of the entire  body of  the old Faith  in our
children. And someday, a descendant of a Traditional Catholic will be there
when Modernism  is pronounced dead and  buried, null and void!  We have not
lost hope,  and we never will, because they cannot  take the Faith from us,
even as  they can  take away the  Mass. If we maintain  intense aversion to
Modernism, the Faith will burn brightly. This venerable flame saw countless
Traditional Catholic families through  the 1970s and ‘80s without the Mass,
and it will see even more through to the new Millennium and beyond, so long
as we keep it in our hearts and in our homes!

The conciliarists and centrists in the movement—God bless them all—are free
to do as they  like, quite obviously. All we humbly ask is that they either
come up alongside in the trenches (where they will be welcomed and embraced
as brothers) and learn  how to fight, or that they take cover in some other
trench. After  all, there’s  a war to  be fought out  here and, truthfully,
incessant  calls  for  compromise  are becoming  more  than  just a  little
annoying...they’re becoming intolerable!

                        Lord preserve the old Faith
                         all the days that we live!

    Source: geocities.com/~ymjcath/CathLink/offline

               ( geocities.com/~ymjcath/CathLink)                   ( geocities.com/~ymjcath)