The Roman Catholic Diaspora Church –
Fact or Fiction ?
by
Prof. Dr. Diether Wendland
translated by Emilia Vaiciulis
A SHORT HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 1)
Shortly after his election, John XXIII announced that an “œcumenical
Council” would be convened, supposedly inspired by a very special
“illumination” of the ‘Holy Ghost’. He then began taking steps to
implement this Council. But manifestly none of the ‘Council Fathers’
hurrying to Rome were aware that this supposed ‘Pope’ was a blatant
heretic (…) In fact, when an œcumenical Council is convened by a
Pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church, it has the ‘assistentia divina’,
i.e. the help or support of the Hoy Ghost in all discussions and
decisions in matters of faith and morals (…) Freely and without any
contradictions did all bishops respond to the call of a flagrant
heretic for this council. And they willingly submitted themselves to
his ‘authority’. What an edifying sight! Such a phenomenon had never
before occurred in the Catholic Church.
We shall quote a statement of Cardinal Döpfner, President of the German
Bishops’ Conference, in order to highlight the erroneous ideas on
Roncalli held by the bishops: “with many others I confidently
hope to see the day when we shall be allowed to venerate Pope John as a
saint of the Church.” In a radio talk-show, Döpfner explained that in
no way was Roncalli’s intention to touch dogmas or any basic principles
of the Church in the slightest way. Because of his rustic origins,
which he himself often referred to, he admitted that even in minor
things he had great sense for values of the past.
With such talk, the uneasiness here and there of the conservative
faithful was calmed down (…) But most Catholics, both clergy and laymen
believed, i.e. they considered even such flagrant lies as the truth. No
public protests were to be noticed anywhere, let alone big
demonstrations against such monstrosities (apart from a later
demonstration with placards by the “Una Voce, Gruppe Maria” one in
Munich, in which Döpfner himself was publicly exposed as a heretic,
together with other ones from the authorities). But a sustained bombardment of heresies lasting over 10 years from the ‘hierarchy’ could not fail to have its effect. Heresies however are the gates of hell because lack of eternal salvation is their direct consequence! (…)
RONCALLI AND HIS ‘ILLUMINATED COUNCIL’
There were also only a few – surprisingly few – who soon after
the start of this so-called “Pastoral Council”, which implicated itself
with the impure ‘spirit of the world’ recognized the horrible fact that
Christ, the Head of the Church, had withdrawn His divine
assistance from a general Council. Numerous clear indications of this
existed. But why? In order to show Catholics that the bishops of
the Church, as a whole in these times, did not amount to anything much.
However for many it was a grace, as far as their knowledge of the Faith
went, and a gift of Christ, who, provided they were of good will, would
help them put aside their blind faith and trust in their bishops, which
had been instilled into them by their education. The element lacking in
blind trust and faith (in the bishops) is, intellectual insight and
critical-rational thinking. For this reason one was justified in
referring to this phenomenon as the widely disseminated “catholic
sickness” which got to epidemic proportions. Later this grave sickness
became mortal-in the religious sense. However, when the supernatural
life coming from God’s grace alone is extinguished, one has no way of
detecting this except by the spi-ritual effects on human nature.
Nobody, not even the most pious person can be assured of definitively
possessing supernatural grace until his death. That is why St. Paul
teaches that each one must work out his salvation “ in fear and
trembling”. (Phil 2, 12).
When a general Council falls into heresy or generates it, this does not
mean that it becomes a pseu-do-council or it never was a council, but
that all the ‘catholic bishops’ and their satellites participating as
the pillars of this council had already become heretics and had
apostasied from the Roman Catholic Church. Besides, in three years this
apostasy had given rise to that monstrous structure the “roman
conciliar church”, not just in Rome but in dioceses world-wide. Its
first Head was Roncalli: he accepted to be crowned with the Tiara to be
universally seen by the faithful and not just by Catholics who were in
Rome itself, in order to win their approval. The TV and radio also
co-operated in widely diffusing this.
If one wishes to come to terms with the disastrous state of the affairs
in the Church, (or with the coup d’état in a State) – one must
strive to consider its real origins, to go back to what the principal
cause was, for without that it would be impossible to grasp where it
would all lead to in the long run. If the ‘2d Vatican Council’ had not
taken place, all attention would have been riveted exclusively on
Roncalli and his henchmen. But the rumpus surrounding the ‘ reformative
council’ deflected many from this consideration. “No reasonable person
could be against reforms”! was the slogan of the day. Even Catholics,
remaining fast to traditions would hardly appreciate their brothers in
the Faith accusing them of being idiotic retrogrades because they
‘didn’t recognize the signs of the times’, because’ they were
old-fashioned’ (…)
At the time, whether it was through sheer ignorance or only partial
understanding of the situation, many confused the visible heretical
world-wide bishops’ corps with the “little flock of Christ” (in the
biblical sense). The fact is, that this flock had ceased to be
visible, whether in its totality or in its parts. 2) But at
least the question was being asked: “What’s doing in the Roman Catholic
Church?” And above all, “what’s this upheaval in the Church?” For
everything was being overturned and questioned. And this was an ongoing
process. Who was behind this? It was the Clergy, because the lay-people
had nothing to say, and besides, they were far too passive as whole to
take any initiative themselves. They were content with the status quo
and to just accept the Faith handed down to them by their forbears.
This sterile attitude continues to this very day.(..)
HOW THE CONCEPT OF APOSTOLICITY WAS REFUSED AND DESTROYED
Hardly was Pius XII, the last pope to date, and hated by a great
number, dead and buried (by whose side (oh horrible thought!) Roncalli
was later interred!- then almost everywhere in the Catholic Church
strange people appeared, above all false mystics (almost exclusively
characterized by a naïve marial devotion) and commonly called persons
benefiting from special ‘illuminative graces’, false prophets and
charismatics, but also reformers of the liturgy, even ‘catholic’
theologians who openly questioned dogmas, or who claimed that these
dogmas were out-of-date! There was no end to all of these evils
darkening the image of the Catholic Church and springing up everywhere.
They were even perceived by non - catholics, but not always with a
malicious joy. Sometimes even with sadness! What then was the origin of
all these evils? Certain people think that the vacancy of the
Apostolic See which had then begun and which continues on to this day
was surely the underlying cause. But that could not be right! Such a
vacancy doesn’t prevent the Holy Ghost working in the Church,
apart from the fact that the Holy Ghost, Who has already been sent for
some time now, ‘breathes, where It will’ and not where some would have
it breathe…
Therefore one can conclude that the cause was not necessarily outside
of the Church, but in the Catholic Church itself. It was in fact
heresies, and heresies alone which were the cause of this type of evil
in the Church! They were actively perpetrated throughout its whole
social structure! One advantage of this vacancy at least, was that it
served to help expose these heresies springing up every where. That is
why one must not only judge this vacancy negatively, but one must try
to understand its significance. Because nothing happens without the
permission of God, Who, after all knows well why He allows certain
physical or moral ills to happen. Only those who either didn’t
recognize that sede-vacantism has been a permanent state of affairs
since Roncalli till the present time, who didn’t understand its
meaning, divided themselves later into two dialectic camps – the
well-known traditionalist- progressivist one, or the old-conservatives
– neo-modernists, without realizing that in fact they were already part
of the ‘conciliar church’ which had integrated them. (…)
Upon considering the imminent ‘reformative Council’, “(…) (it must be
noted that it could not be the second Vatican Council because it had
been convened by a heretic). All those who apprehensively watched this
world spiritual reunion were confronted with the following oppressive
question: how many effective members of the Catholic Church, whether
clerics or lay-people, would be found to have faithfully and loyally
remained in the apostolic Roman Catholic Church at the end of the
‘coun-cil’, in order to take possession of its heritage and to transmit
its veritable doctrine?
For all the agitators who for a long time had been jockeying for a
general Reform Council (weren’t their spokesmen always be seen on
television with reports on the Council?) were bent on radically
breaking with the apostolicity of the Roman Catholic Church. Therein
lay the significance of their motto “reconsider everything” or
“intrepidly set your sights on completely new horizons”. The same
direction was also indicated by the ‘signs of the times’. Later it was
said, and it was only logical: “ there is now no return to the time
before the Council”, precisely because this council had triggered off a
radical new orientation for the Church!
The average catholic, whether layman or religious, was impressed by
this slogan and even considered it quite reasonable. Furthermore, these
radical reformers were very conscious of the undeniable fact that the
majority of Catholics had lost all sense of the apostolicity of the
Church, or else had very vague notions about it; to such an extent that
they were not able to recognize as hypocrisy when on Sundays at the
Mass the reformers openly professed “Credo in …apostolicam Ecclesiam”.
Some knew quite well that they lied like hypocrites, whilst others
were not aware of this. Both parties, however, were present at
Masses celebrated “una cum Roncalli…! “ 3)
EN ROUTE TO THE DIASPORA
The attempt to destroy the apostolicity of the Catholic Church was only
possible by means of a general Council. And this , on the basis of
Vatican I, which excluded the possibility of there being a schism
without a heresy. The blood of the martyrs Sts. Peter and Paul was
already crying out for vengeance from heaven, but the general council
would necessarily push the Church to the outskirts of society and
finally drive it underground- so much so that it finally became a
“Church of the diaspora”. One could even call it the Roman Catholic
Church of the diaspora. The sorrowful diaspora-situation of the
Roman Catholic Church was more or less obvious after the “ solemn
closing” ceremony in Oct. 1965 (and the date of its first session),
when there could no longer be any doubt that all the ‘bishops’ places
were occupied by heresiarchs. These began to “pasture” their flocks-
the catholic faithful- in a “new spirit”. In this they were aided by
the clergy - i.e. the clerics submitted to them, - in order to
incorporate as many Catholics as possible into the summary “conciliar
church” (…) Only the ‘living’ (as opposed to ‘dead’) members of the
Roman Catholic Church-diaspora did not lose their christocentric
perspective. They were equally conscious that a Church in diaspora did
not lose its apostolicity at all. (This point was a worry for some). In
this respect, it could only be prejudiced, albeit rather severely.
This is why the following question must be asked, which it will be
hardly easy to answer: to what extend could its apostolicity be
prejudiced ? In fact, the apostolicity of the Church is indestructible.
The Church was founded not just by any man, but by Jesus Christ, who
built it on “ the foundation of the apostles and prophets”, as St. Paul
teaches (Eph. 2,20). All ‘living’ members and dignitaries of the
catholic- Church- in – diaspora know this, and for this reason
they find themselves in radical contradiction with the ‘conciliar
Roman church’ and those with positions of authority.
The end of the year 1965 stands under the sign of this contradiction,
and also marks the beginning of a thorny way for the diaspora. At that
time the question was raised not only as to how many would be ready to
knowingly and courageously engaged on this way, but also to do what was
necessary and right to ensure survival- for one self and with others.
For it not at all easy to persevere and endure in a diaspora-state of
affairs, especially if it was going to extend over several generations
(those who were old in 1965 have, in 1990, since died ).
THE GREAT WEAKNESS OF RESISTANCE
The death of Pius XII in 1958 was felt as a strange void by many.
Mourning for this “ rock in the midst of ocean-breakers” was
unbounded and unanimous on the part of the catholic faithful. It was
from this time on that the apostolic Roman Catholic Church,
increasingly took on the character of a diaspora-Church, and (
understandably) this went unnoticed by the overwhelming majority of the
faithful. It was only seven years after, in 1965, that it became more
noticeable. However, there was no transformation of its essence, and
only its state and way of life had changed.
In the light of this knowledge this question can again be raised: what
would be the situation of the Church at the end of the
diaspora-itinerary, if in the meantime no way out had been found for
it? Would it come to the state of affairs in the Church described by
St. Paul: ‘the same Lord, the same Faith, the same Baptism’ (Eph. 4,5)?
Or rather, would the state of the Church at the end of its way be more
in line with what St. John describes in Ch. 12, 13-18 of the
Apocalypse? ‘The Woman’ there mentioned would not pertain so much to
Mary as to the persecuted Church: which would flee into the
‘wilderness’, to her ‘place of refuge (…) where she would be well
hidden from the serpent’s sight”. The dragon, however, filled with
fury, would in his fight “make war on the rest of her children, on
those who kept God’s commandments and held fast to the truth concerning
Jesus".
We are still far from this point, because one cannot compare the
diaspora to a ‘desert’, in which both persecuted and refugees are
obliged to eke out an existence as they can. In the diaspora the
opportunity to forge weapons, set up an army (…), and rise up against
the neighbouring enemy, dissimu-lated in the bosom of the ‘conciliar
church’- still exist!
In no way was this enemy a ’dragon’ or a ‘beast in service of the
dragon’, or even an enormous scorpion whose bite was to be feared, but
a large inflated tortoise with scintillating colours, subsisting on
flies and worms, all it had it was a gaping mouth which continuously
emitted pseudo-prophecies and inane promises without intermittence. And
this is what Rome, “urbi et orbi” has been doing before the world since
1965 … Without a well defined enemy, the Catholic diaspora-Church is
only fighting against windmills. It ceases to be the “Ecclesia
militans” proceeding on its way (…) However even Resistance-fighters
themselves will become battle-weary, their resources being exhausted.
It is then that they will hang on mystical crosses(…)
An ineptitude bordering on coma characterizes the ‘leadership’ of the
diaspora-Church. This was remarked on right at the beginning, between
1962 and 1969. This is not to be attributed so much to the continual
vacancy of the apostolic See, as to three deficiencies concerning the
dioceses. One did not have to look too far to try to find a solution
for them:
1.
There was no organized social structure of the diaspora-Church. This
would have had a really useful role to play in preventing the spread of
already latent sectarianism, and many groups, larger or smaller, would
have benefited from it.
2. There was no central
regional (as opposed to national) council of Catholics with a
proper theological formation, (e.g. for the German speaking countries).
This council would have been competent to give practical directives and
guidelines in organizing the life of the ‘exiled’ Church. The faithful
would have referred to them for a ruling on either religious or
canonical matters. This council would have confirmed them in the Faith,
thus not permit-ting them to feel abandoned to themselves.
3. The absence of competent
catechists for young adults who had already begun to work or had a
career, who could deal with such issues as Christian marriages and the
foundation of Christian families, apart from dealing with problems
which cropped up in a diaspora situation…Now as a general rule, the
priests were almost always inept at catechising adults because they
were not trained accordingly. This had been generally admitted by
experts in the matter. Only those lay-people who had received a
theological formation and who were actively involved in adult education
and were in touch with their problems were to be considered. Alas, the
ones who would have fulfilled all these criteria were not easy to find.
Fortunately there was also a need for other kinds of catechists, for
which the demand could be met: catechism lessons for children, for
example, could be entrusted to parents, since the faithful of the
diaspora were well aware of their obligations.
"HOPING AGAINST HOPE"
Is it still possible to remedy the three main causes weakening the
catholic diaspora -Church? This oppressive question has been actual for
quite some time. Yet with others, I am of the opinion that twenty-five
years of unattained goals and the regrettable experiences of that
period will have made the situation irremediable. The only hope would
be a special miracle worked by Christ Himself which would dissipate
this general inefficacity, based almost entirely on human respect. By
this miracle, many would clearly recognize that Our Lord never abandons
His own, above all, when through no fault of their own they have been
dispersed!
There are those who see the situation and understand how it came about
without having the necessary means to rectify the weaknesses. As for
the others, it is a fact that Christ does not love cowards and
weaklings, but favours the valiant, who ‘hope against hope’ and expect
help only from the Lord, and not from certain men posing as liberators
and messengers of hope Christ Himself raised the alarm against
these usurpers, presenting themselves in ‘sheep’s clothing’ but who in
reality were ravenous wolves (…). There are quite a few Catholics of
our ranks who (probably because they didn’t see the diaspora-actuality
clearly or realistically enough), believed that the situation of the
Church would redress itself “when we have true catholic bishops again”,
as they said. But even though we do possess some bishops who can be so
considered, the state of affairs has not changed at all: The fact that
such bishops exist is of no use for ending this diaspora existence. And
this is confirmed by the experience of many.
An effective way of helping redress the situation would be missionary
activity by lay-apostles with fixed, readily attainable objectives set
before them. Bur their ‘modus operandi’ would be completely different
to that adopted by the brash, hypocritical “Pro Pope and Church
Movement”. Our lay-missionaries would be humble and simple, their only
ideal being to serve Christ and His Church, always prepared to be
courageously outspoken in bearing witness to Christ, and
unswerving in carrying out His commandments. Obviously the lukewarm or
cowardly would be excluded from their ranks.
When He founded His Church, Christ did not restrict Himself to just the
apostles, but He had disciples too, whom He also sent on
missions. Today it is painful and sad to think that modern Catholics
are no longer aware that they are disciples too, or, if they are, they
don’t act accordingly. Alas! The most one can expect today is to
encounter spiritual descendants of the two disciples of Emmaus: slow
of wit and dull of heart, and held back by human respect. Are we
bound to accept this state of affairs? By no means! A change for the is
within our reach. We must not forget that Our Lord wishes us to always
turn to Him in prayer, because He is truly our Lord and Master. Nobody,
whether cleric or layman, can achieve anything without Him! (…) More is
required than just being personally pious and devout in order to save
one’s soul in a diaspora situation. Has not Christ said: “he who tries
to save his life will lose it”?
At this point, no one can tell for how long this diaspora period of the
Church, which has been so shaken in its principle of
apostolicity, will endure. and it is Christ and He alone who will
reverse the situation when the right moment comes. Whatever we want and
would seek to attain is of no avail. Who would dare to deny that in one
way or an other he did not have a share in the responsibility for the
miserable state of affairs at present? Yes, the guilt must be laid on
the shoulders of the clergy, of course, but the failure of the
lay-people must also not be under-estimated. There is quite a lot to be
done by them before the situation improves. But they must work
according to Christ’s mandates: “He does not gather with Me scatters”.
Otherwise the situation will get a lot worse before it gets better. And
no “gathering with Christ” is possible without the laity participating
in missionary apostolate specifically for them. This is something which
certain diaspora bishops ought to understand. And unless the situation
has changed, there is only one bishop so far to have grasped this. The
rest of us live like ostriches with their heads buried in the sand. We
are still mistakenly orientated to living our Faith in the context of
Church conditions of the past. We fail to realize that these are
completely incompatible with the vastly different conditions of
today: the problems we are con-fronted with did not exist in those
days.
Recently a book was published in the United States:” Will the Catholic
Church survive the twentieth century?” The title alone indicates how
the traditionalists who used it were labouring under the illusion that
the Church could be ‘salvaged’ by them. This only goes to show how far
they had strayed from an adequate appraisal of the situation of the
apostolic Roman catholic Church today. Not only were they on the wrong
track but they were fumbling blindly around without the slightest clue
as to the reality of the situation. Let us explain. The upper ranks of
the hierarchy are to be blamed for the Church’s downfall. Its
(reaedificatio) rebuilding from the ruins can take place in only one
way- from the grass-roots level up, with the means best adapted for
this, and obviously with Christ divine assistance, for without that one
would only be building on shifting sand and mud.
A DIVINE CHASTISMENT
Despite the fact that the diaspora situation of the Roman
Catholic Church has now existed for over 25 years, it is unfortunate
that many are still not aware of this. It may be considered as a
chastisement from the Holy Trinity, being more remedial in nature
rather than purely vindictive . As such, one must not shrink from it.
To do so would be as stupid and childish as to reject a salutary
medicinal potion being offered, just because it was bitter. This
applies for us too. For our condition as members of a diaspora Church
is just as bitter. Certainly it is no sweet treat!
Every now and again we meet with Catholics, pious enough, but
nevertheless discontent with their lot. They continually lament
that they have not Pope or bishops. But I ask them why is this so
terrible? Is Christ alone not sufficient to us?…Apart from showing us
which are the ways we are to go, is He Himself not The Way? Aren’t
these words of Our Lord clear enough for these anxious Catholics? Yet
paradoxically, in the meantime these roads which lead directly to Him
are practically deserted, though signposts are to be found all over the
roads. But the crux of the matter is that these signposts are now
obsolete; for His Camp has shifted, though its old buildings still
remain standing. Most still follow these old signposts. There are only
very few enlightened Catholics in our ranks who are aware that these
signs must now be read from an altogether different perspective: In
other words, why do we not break once and for all with the ‘dead’
(fallen-away) members of the Church, rather seeking to establish
contact with its living members? One can no longer unquestioningly
accept the present – day popes and bishops as the “light of the world”
per se, even though they may be considered ’validly elected”. .It is
useless, pleading ignorance in the matter any longer either in order to
escape one’s responsibilities. The spiritual well-being of our
fellow-Christians and the good of the Church as a whole are at stake!
It does not suffice to profess and adhere to the true doctrines of the
Church. This doctrine must also be intelligently presented so that it
can bear its fruit in due season. In fact, the doctrine of the
Faith lends itself to critical analysis. It well withstands the
test of being scrutinised in this way. One cannot say as much for
trendy present –day ideologies, or for the so-called World Religions.
Specifically Christian doctrines, however, are clear and logical. In no
way are they a confusing, incoherent jumble of religiously coloured
dicta ! For heaven’s sake, why don’t Catholics listen to Him Who
is not only the source of truth, but Who IS Truth Itself?
Instead, they pay attention to heretics, even considering them as
“theologians”… They seem to have forgotten that Christ and the apostles
also taught, commanded, and put into practice what they taught! Why
don’t Catholics read the Acts of the Apostles in an intelligent way?
They are full of common sense, and so are applicable to present – day
conditions. Surely it will strike some that there is nothing so new in
the situation we are confronted with today- they already existed in the
days of the apostles! History-whether secular or
ecclesiastical, tends to repeat itself. A truly militant Catholic
Church can never reach its final goal in this world/ It is itinerant by
nature and this fact must not be overlooked. It is never set in a fixed
geographical location, or native to any particular place, because it is
of this world, but not of it. (…) The catholic Church – in diaspora –
always bears these hallmarks.It is in contrast to Church militant,
despite its weakened state. It is in contrast to the conciliar Church
which is adapted to the ‘world’. and to the ‘spirit of the world’.
The conciliar ‘church’, which has otherwise accepted all catholic
sectarian groups and associations into its ranks, has not
succeeded in winning over and destroying the Catholic diaspora
Church, despite the latter’s generally weakened condition , because
Jesus Christ is its foundation-stone and its Lord. (…) And even here,
those who are dispersed but nevertheless belong to the apostolic
Roman Catholic Church (the “Mater et Magistra” of old) can be
distinguished from those who have gone astray in the Faith, but still
call themselves catholics. But that they are not Roman Catholics can be
easily verified, even indirectly. In fact, those Catholics who are
aware of their diaspora condition are usually convinced Christo-centric
fundamentalists and confirmed sede-vacantists as well. It is high time
that the Catholic Church in diaspora finally accepted its status quo
and acted accordingly. Many of its members in diverse regions, though
aware that the one true Church was not exactly ‘in the limelight’
should now resolve to overcome their fear of human respect, the
greatest obstacle to openly acknowledging Christ, the sole’ Good
Shepherd’. Till the stumbling-block of human respect is not put
aside, Catholics cannot forge ahead with zeal in bearing witness to
Christ or obey His command to “arise, be not afraid!” (Matt. 17, 7), or
“do not be afraid, speak out and refuse to be silenced” ( Acts 18,9).
There are special graces given to the Church –in – diaspora.. Why
refuse to accept them? Nobody is more aware of our situation and that
of the Church today then Christ Him-self. He is The Teacher par
excellence. So why not accept His teachings? It were better to
repudiate those false teachers (both men and women) causing such
ravages by both their ‘catechising’ and their teaching of class-room
curricula. No Catholic adhering to the true Faith could in conscience
confide the teaching of his children to such individuals (…).
CATHOLICS IN THE SHADOW OF THE CONCILIAR CHURCH
The apostate conciliar church, with its new doctrines, new cult, new
rites, and new canon law has become a real sociological entity, despite
many difficulties, to such an extent that it has now eclipsed the real
Catholic Church (of the diaspora) from public view. Its existence is
not remarked by society, nor by the liberal democratic states. Even the
mass-media and the German Christian democratic political parties seem
to be unaware of its presence. So to what extent is a disapora
Church detectable? It is visible- more or less- . Its characteristic of
holiness- less so, which does not mean that it is not there. The
conciliar church, on the other hand, is readily seen by all, whether
Catholics or non-Catholics. But where are those who clearly and
distinctly discern that this monstrous entity has nothing whatsoever to
do with the apostolic R.C. Church of old?
The Church is a specific socio-religious entity existing in this world,
but divinely instituted, by the Son of God. It is built on the
foundation of the prophets and apostles. Christ also instituted the
sacraments (visible channels of grace) in it in a determined order. Now
it is important for the members of the (diaspora)Church to take
into account that in the course of salvific history the sacraments are
transmitted from one generation to an other by means of a specific
process. They would do well to take note of this, because with the help
of grace the weakness in the Church could be surmounted; with this
awareness, the diaspora Church would be prevented from taking the wrong
course, thus aggravating the situation. Moreover, diaspora Catholics
ought to recall that Our Lord Jesus Christ is there to defend the weak.
He never sides with the strong and self reliant. It is necessary to
make a distinction between weak and weaklings. The latter are
characterized by cowardice. And if one reflects on the matter, most of
those who cry “make peace not war” are cowards. They prefer to stay on
the sidelines as onlookers, or they “disappear into thin air” when
Christ is blasphemed or publicly ridiculed or slandered, by words or
pictures, and this is legally permitted! Such is the general situation
today. Today’s (diaspora) Catholics have come to realize that in spite
of the perplexity of some situations and manoeuvres to divert
from admitting the reality of the situation, after they were separated
from the conciliar church, it was evident for them, that the Church
could not continue without the sacraments of Baptism and Matrimony.
This was something new and thought-provoking for many, including
several members of the clergy. It seemed that the priest was not
absolutely indispensable for administering the sacrament of
Baptism, independently of the fact that the diaspora situation of the
Church is ipse facto an ’emergency’ one. For example it would be a
grave, irreparable crime not to see to it that , in the absence of
priests, their children were and receiving the sacrament of Marriage.
Now the diaspora Church has the mission and the duty to reorganize and
set up regulative norms for these two realities: this task would fall
on the central regional council of which we spoke earlier - the only
organization competent to assume this responsibility. The aim would be
to realistically tackle any problems as they came, without referring
back to the past and wishing that they would be other than what they
were.
No one knows the future, even of his own life, because it is a secret
of God. He rarely allows a preview of what will happen, but sometimes
he does so indirectly by indicating that one has taken a wrong turn on
the “religious” road. As for the famous ‘signs of the times’- they have
to be discerned first as to whether they come from God or from the
devil. It is also somewhat bizarre that these days many people who are
‘shipwrecked’ both morally and religiously walk behind the banner of
“religious liberty”- whether moral or religious. In the meantime, what
is there to prevent the diaspora Church from openly coming to the fore
under its own banner- a visible ‘sign of contradiction’ at least, on
the regional level? Understandably, this would require courage,
determination and fortitude in the face of inevitable reversals. Then
there was the question of the pusillanimous. Who would encourage them
and bolster up their hope? …
“Since our salvation is founded upon the hope of something. Hope would
not be hope at all if its object were in view. How could a man still
hope for something which he already sees? And if we are hoping for
something still unseen, the we need endurance to wait for it.” (Rom. 8,
24 ff). Patience implies a passive attitude. The Christian virtue of
hope is not vague or indeterminate, but it has an absolute,
unconditional goal: He Who IS the Way and the Truth.
THE TIME IS NOT YET RIPE FOR THE RENEWAL OF THE CHURCH
The more one comes to terms with the reality of the apostate, heretical
‘conciliar church’, the more its treachery is exposed; but there are
many obvious disadvantages and weaknesses found right
throughout the diaspora-Church. The vacancy of the Holy See dating from
1958 is one that is readily visible, but it is not the only one. Since
the beginning of the diaspora, when the Church had hardly begun to
muster its forces, and later, when it was engaged in active Resistance,
its efforts were unfortunately dissipated and not properly organized.
They were directed more against somewhat secondary issues resulting
from the Council.
For the fundamental evils and defects attacking the very base of the
Catholic Church’s structure were regrettably only vaguely perceived,
and this hindered and even aggravated attempts to reconstruct the
Church in those early stages.
If we now consider the prospect for the Church in different regions
throughout the world, we must conclude that ‘5 past midnight’ has
definitively struck. As for the state of affairs globally no-one is in
a position to judge this except the Lord , Who is the Head of the
Church, and those whom He chooses to reveal the global
situation. Those of us who live so dispersed have to bide our time,
whilst “putting our hope in the Lord as long as we live. We don’t have
private revelations or dreams or strange and ridiculous so-reputed
Marian ‘apparitions’. We hear no voices (interior or exterior)
announcing what will happen to us in the near or distant future,
telling us what we should think, or what course of action we should
adopt (…) No, but our lot is to persist in the belief that Christ Our
Lord will have pity on us and come to the rescue of the innocent and
helpless. (…)
When Vatican II definitely broke with the R.C. Church of old (…) it was
powerless to essentially change it, apart from affecting its day to day
life and its ‘state’ as a Church.
Several were quite concerned at seeing this definitive break, but fewer
still could gauge its real implications. Furthermore, the handful of
those who were now outcasts or exiles in the diaspora camp were in the
precarious situation of being shunned by editors of Catholic
publications and journals.
Several were quite concerned at seeing this definitive break, but fewer
still could gauge its real implications. Furthermore, the handful of
those who were now outcasts or exiles in the diaspora camp were in the
precarious situation of being shunned by editors of Catholic
publications and journals. There was general opposition to them both
from Catholic editors and readers who put up protective cotton-wool
walls around themselves; who shrivelled you with scorching fire leaping
from their eyes if you dared to refuse to blow the trumpet of the holy
‘council’ like all the bishops. It is astonishing to see how certain
Catholics, very well grounded in their Faith, suddenly changed camp (…)
At this moment certain old, unresolved problems which were always
deferred till later came to the fore again. For example the problem of
unity between the laity and the clergy in the Church had been
considered ‘normal’ for quite a long time. The cause of unity was
certainly hindered by the devastating effects of clericalism
whose roots went back to the 18th century. Clericalism was a
great impediment to unity in the Church.
There were a considerable number of Catholics who kept the Faith
integrally but just did not see the parallelism between the diaspora
Church and the new conciliar church. Not because they were naive, but
because their attention was being continually diverted by disputes on
matters of secondary importance (…) This was a deliberate strategy,
used to camouflage the rupture with the venerable Catholic Church of
old. It was a pity that the vast majority of the faithful were devoid
of a critical sense; and it is precisely because of that that it was
easy to “pull the wool over their eyes” with the insidious introduction
of the sacrilegious celebration of the “Supper of the Lord”, or the
“Eucharist” (una cum Roncalli or Montini). Those of the faithful who
participated in them were unteachable. They refused to want to know
what was really going on. And here a difficult question of rather a
different nature cropped up: where there any Catholics, especially more
educated ones, who were prepared to take supplementary advanced
Catechism courses in order to spread and defend the Faith? But how
could such adults be contacted? They might be found amongst friends ant
acquaintances. A personal approach might prove fruitful, but there were
more efficient ways of doing it. It was quickly realized that a basic
strategy for apostolic activity was wanting. It would be specifically
adapted to laity of the diaspora. For such a program to be useful,
however, quite a number of ‘applicants‘ for this project were needed,
and their work would have to be backed up. But this was an impossible
dream. In fact, a good, useful and pertinent plan of action would be
sure to attract a lot of attention, especially in a time of general
religious confusion. On the whole, all would be aware of such a
program, unless they were spiritually blind or had no interest in their
Church.
THE DIASPORA CHURCH – AN UNDENIABLE FACT
In the 60’s most of those whom we discussed Church problems with
thought that the diaspora Church was a ‘fiction’. But in the
70’s, the number of sceptics had considerably diminished. And in the
80’s, none of those still around used the term ‘fiction’ any more. A
few were conscious of being diaspora Catholics, even within their own
families, and were at a loss what to do about it. Sons and daughters-
in – law, parents and friends scoffed at them. At the best they were
considered as out-dated, refusing the spirit of aggiornamento. More
than living on the outskirts of society, they were outside it! They are
to be situated in the Catholic diaspora Church. As such, they seem
weak. In reality they are stronger than all those around them. They
know where they are going and will on no account deviate from the way.
Nor do they flee to hide themselves away, but it is true that the way
is narrow, on the other hand, it is precisely because of this that it
leads on more easily to their destination. (…)
Despite the fact that the Apostolic Church was still viable, priests
and theologians tainted with clericalism continued to point out to
others that it was no longer so strong and powerful, in order to negate
its existence in their eyes. However, as the Apostolic Church was
gradually transformed into the diaspora (or eclipsed) Church, the
latter’s weaknesses became more clearly evident. For its progress
through time it now took an other route. But because the detour was so
sudden and unexpected, it was impossible to raise the alarm about its
changes of direction. To put it another way: if a child falls into a
well, the best one can hope for is to retrieve him from it covered with
bruises – provided his cries for help have been heard. After the years
1962-65, “the children of the Catholic Church” fell into a deep well en
masse. A large number of ‘rescuers’ would have been necessary to get
them all out. And as for the ‘vineyard of the Lord’ there was less and
less to see of it because the field-mice had burrowed and bred
extensively in it. Several ask themselves where they had sprung from.
Others, better informed, could have told them that they had been there
for quite a long time.
In the 60’s, especially in the Catholic countries, there were also
those who would previously never have admitted any criticism of the
holy Catholic Church and had always defended it, who now turned away
with aversion from the official Church (it was considered as such) and
refused to have any more dealings with it. How could one interpret this
phenomenon? Amongst those busying themselves with the matter
there were two trains of thought, but both were wrong. Some thought
that it was something to do with an ‘internal emigration’ or a
‘spiritual emigration’ of the Catholic Church. But that would have
signified apostasy (of the Church). The others- clergy for the most
part- spoke inconsiderately of ‘the apostasy of the Catholic Faith’ and
they thought that these recalcitrant Catholics had ipso facto become
infidels because one never saw them at the new masses on Sundays.
The reality was that in their case it was nothing at all to do with
having lost the Faith! On the contrary, it was a defensive attitude, an
instinctive way of protecting themselves against all the evils
springing up and proliferating all around them, as a result of the
reformative council. This type of Catholic was generally of a higher
social and cultural level, hardly deserving the label ‘apostate’, even
if he sometimes declared quite loudly and bravely that in the future he
would keep well at a distance from all that was going on in the Church.
But his ‘bark was worse than his bite’, for it was a burst of
suppressed anger resulting from all the terrible things he had heard or
undergone, including having his name blackened. Basically, without
being aware of it, this type of Catholic sought to escape the ‘spirit
of the Council’ and its consequences for the Church as a whole. But who
was going to enlighten this category of Catholic and help him
understand that the R.C. Church was already on diaspora
course? For the present, nobody knows where these indignant
Catholics are to be found, or what’s become of them. Somehow, in the
process of the Church being eclipsed they were dispersed and later,
apart from a few cases, they could not be recuperated.
Whether traditionalists or progressivists, old-Catholics or
neo-modernists, all commonly shared the belief that the conciliar
church since its inception was a stylised sort of Catholicism
with a new set of creeds. This belief was also held by those who did
not know enough about the reasons for the coming into being of the
exiled R.C. Church. These different groups overlooked the fact that
this conciliar church also bears the hallmarks of a grotesque new
‘Counter-Church’. These Catholics perpetually move around in circles,
on cue like trained circus-horses in the ring, held on leashes by an
invisible ‘dompteur’ (trainer), and applauded by a huge crowd of
spectators. The latter, having paid for their tickets (i.e.
church-taxes), now expect to see a good show for their money … To
explain this: ordinarily the throngs in the church are passive by
nature and slow to react. What the ‘religious’ throngs expect from the
conciliar church nowadays is not salvation but a panem et
circenses (bread and games) spectacle, with as much variety as
possible, and no strings attached.
NO ROSY FUTURE IN VIEW
What can a few dispersed individuals do in such a vast field of action?
The R.C. Church will certainly survive through the centuries. There is
no doubt about this. Christ is with it and with its frail members. The
only question now is, how will it survive? If we make a survey, there
is much uncertainty about the situation, even in Europe, where it is
easier than elsewhere to make an appraisal. Together with others, I
personally don’t pin too much hope on a so -called diaspora
organized ‘semi-council’ for specific purposes, or even for a ‘papal
election’, without there first being a form of operational organization
specially adapted to the R.C. Church. And it would be much better to
first organize it on the regional level before proceeding to the
supra-regional level. The first duty of the Church in exiled conditions
is to strive to achieve unity. This is done by respecting and adopting
as norms all those principles which foster ecclesiastical unity 4),
remembering that the Church is situated on a higher plane than
conventional sociological entities in the world.
The conciliar roman Church does not just exist in Rome, where its
leader can be located- except when he’s off on another “pilgrimage”. It
is also ensconced in all those dioceses where it has been able to make
a ‘peaceful’ takeovers of territory without encountering resistance.
The term for it is occupation… As for the occupants themselves, they
are none other than thieves and plunderers of others’ property.
Unfortunately, they have not received any reproaches for their
usurpation – members of the diaspora resistance are too feeble to
fight. But in the meantime no one is obliged to pay church-taxes or
other donations to those occupants! (Apart from the fact that exiled
Catholics have only dry bread to look forward to anyway!) And how can
someone who contributes church-taxes be walled Catholic? …That
Catholics are only too few in number is demonstrated by the rare
exceptions who step out of the conciliar church set-up…
If Catholics wish to avoid doing harm to their souls or diminishing the
liveliness of their Faith through apathy, self-pity, inactivity or
refusal to ‘open their mouths’, first of all they have to be aware of
two dangers existing at the present time, but which are fundamentally
different from one another:
1. The colossal monstrosity of the heretical apostate conciliar roman church, with its members and adepts and
2. The great weakness of the
R.C. diaspora Church. Unfortunately, this situation is not helped by
its members. This Church leads a separate existence from the conciliar
church. For after all, as any reasonable person would admit, one cannot
provide a cure for any physical or moral ailments unless these have
been diagnosed. Unless this is done, inevitably one arrives at a dead
end. And this has been the state of affairs for many years now, without
there having been any improvement in the exiled Church’s
condition. Nobody can deny this fact.
It is high time to do some stock-taking so is not to flounder
completely. Furthermore, exiled Catholics should also beware of their
‘traditionalist’ (sic) enemies, because for many of the faithful they
are just as dangerous as the conciliar ones!…It is useless and
meaningless for Catholics to worry and make wild speculations about the
future of the Church, and what duties and responsibilities every
baptised member has. For, as St. Paul says: in the Church “all are
members of one another; if one member suffers, the other suffers with
it”.
Now the Catholic Church in exile is suffering from a generalised,
clearly perceptible weakness, resulting from specific causes. The least
that can be done is to diagnose them. Efforts in this direction could
be made by concerted action on the regional level- if that were still
feasible. And for the exiled condition of the Church itself-
there was a moment in time when it began. So why should there not be a
term to all this in the future? Let us pray unceasingly and sincerely
to Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Good Shepherd, to obtain His help!
For all who are not with Him are against Him! And He knows them all by
name!…
Remarks:
1) Note: First written in 1973, this article was
somewhat modified in 1990 and more extensive revisions were made in
July 2000 by the author. The first part is abridged here, with
editorial comments from EINSICHT.
2) The „little flock“ consists of disciples and apostles called by the
Lord; they are to be distinguished from the far more numerous
“followers“.
3) Apart from that Roncalli had eliminated the Prologue of St. John at the end of the Mass. That was an embarrassing sign!
4) Contrary to the situation in Europe, in Mexico this reconstruction
has been ongoing for some time now. There, not only diaspora
communities have flourished but real parishes have cropped up where
pastoral activities take place on a regular basis.
|
