Edit: We received this interesting piece which addresses the life of Father Roger Thomas Calmel, O.P., about some of the preliminaries that led to Vatican II and the defeat of scholasticism in France, which took place well in advance of the fateful year of 1963. We've also attached the postscript by Roberto de Mattei. This was originally posted on Rorate Caeli, but taken down for some reason:
Posted by Sacerdos Romanus at 2/27/2016 @ Rorate-Caeli
Pope Pius XI’s condemnation of a political party supported by many French Catholic royalists was a revival of the ralliement of Pope Leo XIII, a dangerous ecclesiastical policy that was reversed by St. Pius X [see comment below]. The condemnation paved the way for the rise of a new theology that would be of great influence at Vatican II.
The Condemnation of Action Française and the Birth of the Nouvelle Theologie
The Condemnation of Action Française signaled the end of Thomist dominance in French seminary studies and the arrival of the nouvelle theologie. As a result three leading Thomists were fired from their jobs: Fr. Henri LeFloch, cssp, rector of the French seminary in Rome, Cardinal Louis Billot, SJ who taught at the Greg and Fr. Thomas Pegues, OP regent of studies at St. Maximin in Provence.
On the eve of the Condemnation, Fr. Marie Vincent Bernadot, OP and Fr. Etienne Lajeunie, OP met with Pius XI. They found common goals. Pius XI wanted to normalize relations with the French government and an opening for his beloved Catholic Action. Frs. Bernadot and Lajeunie wanted the removal of Fr. Pegues from his post at St. Maximin and a ban on Action Française as the bastion of Thomism.
In the wake of the condemnation Fr. Bernadot would launch his journal, La Vie Intellectuelle and a publishing house, Editions du Cerf that would publish Catholicism by Fr. Henri de Lubac, SJ. The conventional account of this affair is newly told by Fr. Peter Bernardi, SJ “Action Française Catholicism and Opposition to Vatican II’s Dignitatis Humanae” in the festschrift A Realist Church: Essays in honor of Fr. Joseph Komonchak. Fr. Bernardi tries to convict Cardinal Billot of antiliberalism, failing to convict Pius XI for a monumental error which Pius XII would reverse in his first act as pope. Vide Philippe Prevost, “Condamnation de l’Action française : preferer la verite historique a route papolatrie.” But the last word belongs to a saint. Fr. Roger Thomas Calmel, OP writes at the end of his life (1974):
Between the two modernisms there was the savage condemnation of Action Francaise; in that lamentable affair a pope very authoritarian unable to understand that his repressive operations carried out according to his desire, had no. other outcome than disaster; first the crushing of Catholics attached to the Syllabus, then the rise of an episcopacy not opposed to modern errors; regarding the famous Catholic Action, it would not find any advantage other than politicizing itself and bending in the direction of socialism.
“The ralliement of Leo XIII: a pastoral experience that moved away from doctrine” – by Roberto de Mattei
Posted by New Catholic at 3/19/2015 @ Rorate-Caeli.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-ralliement-of-leo-xiii-pastoral.html
Roberto de Mattei
March 18, 2015
The 1905 Separation, the complete failure of Leo XIII’s policy of ralliement:
“The Separation: ‘Let us separate – I will keep your assets.'”
Leo XIII (1878-1903) was certainly one of the most important Popes in modern times, not only for the length of his pontificate, second only to Blessed Pius IX’s, but above all for the extent and richness of his Magisterium. His teaching includes encyclicals of fundamental importance, such as Aeterni Patris (1879) on the restoration of Thomist philosophy, Arcanum (1880) on the indissolubility of marriage, Humanum genus (1884) against Masonry, L’Immortale Dei (1885) on the Christian constitution of the States and Rerum Novarum (1891) on the question of work and social life.
The Magisterium of Pope Gioacchino Pecci appears as an organic corpus, in continuation with the teachings of his predecessor Pius IX as well as his successor Pius X. The real turning point and novelty of the Leonine pontificate, by contrast, is in regard to his ecclesiastical politics and pastoral approach to modernity. Leo XIII’s government was characterized in fact, by the ambitious project of reaffirming the Primate of the Apostolic See through a redefinition of its relationship with the European States and the reconciliation of the Church with the modern world. The politics of ralliement, that is, of reconciliation with the French, secular, Masonic Third Republic, formed its basis.
The Third Republic was conducting a violent campaign of de-Christianization, particularly in the scholastic field. For Leo XIII, the responsibility of this anticlericalism lay with the monarchists who were fighting the Republic in the name of their Catholic faith. In this way they were provoking the hate of the republicans against Catholicism. In order to disarm the republicans, it was necessary to convince them that the Church was not adverse to the Republic, but only to secularism. And to convince them, he retained that there was no other way than to support the republican institutions.
In reality, the Third Republic was not an abstract republic, but the centralized Jacobin daughter of the French Revolution. Its program of secularization in France was not an accessory element, but the reason itself for the existence of the republican regime. The republicans were what they were because they were anti-Catholic. They hated the Church in the Monarchy, in the same way that the monarchists were anti-republican because they were Catholics who loved the Church in the Monarchy.
The encyclical Au milieu des solicitudes of 1891, through which Leo XIII launched the ralliement did not ask Catholics to become republicans, but the instructions from the Holy See to nuncios and bishops, coming from the Pontiff himself, interpreted his encyclical in this sense. Unprecedented pressure was exercised on the faithful, even going as far as making them believe that whoever continued to support the monarchy publically was committing a grave sin. Catholics were split into two currents of the “ralliés” and the “réfractaires”, as had happened in 1791, at the time of the civil Constitution for clergy. The ralliés accepted the Pope’s pastoral indications as they attached infallibility to his words in all fields, including those political and pastoral.
The réfractaires who were Catholics with better theological and spiritual formation, on the other hand, resisted the politics of ralliement, retaining that, inasmuch as it was a pastoral act, it could not be considered infallible and thus could be erroneous. Jean Madiran, who did a lucid critique of ralliement (in Les deux démocraties, NEL, Paris 1977), noted that Leo XIII had asked the monarchists to abandon the monarchy in the name of religion in order to conduct a more efficacious battle in defense of the faith. Except that, far from fighting this battle, with the ralliement, he effected a ruinous policy of détente with the enemies of the Church.
Despite Leo XIII and his Secretary of State Mariano Rampolla’s endeavor, this policy of dialogue was a sensational failure and unable to obtain the objectives it proposed. The Anti-Christian behavior of the Third Republic increased in violence, until culminating in Loi concernant la Séparation des Eglises et de l’Etat on December 9th 1905, known as “the Combes law” which suppressed all financing and public recognition of the Church; it considered religion merely in the private dimension and not in the social one; it established that ecclesiastical goods be confiscated by the State, while buildings of worship were given over gratuitously to “associations cultuelles” elected by the faithful, without Church approval. The Concordat of 1801, that had for a century regulated the relations between France and the Holy See, and that Leo XIII had desired to preserve at all costs, fell wretchedly to pieces.
The republican battle against the Church, however, encountered the new Pope along its way, – Pius X, elected to the Papal throne on August 4th 1903. With his encyclicals Vehementer nos of February 11th 1906, Gravissimo officii of August 10th of the same year, Une fois encore of January 6th 1907, Pius X, assisted by his Secretary of State Raffaele Merry del Val, he protested solemnly against the secular laws, urging Catholics to oppose them through all legal means, with the aim of conserving the traditions and values of Catholic France. Faced with this determination, the Third Republic did not dare activate the persecution fully, so as to avoid the creation of martyrs, and thus renounced the closing of the churches and the imprisonment of priests. Pius X’s politics without concessions, proved to be far-sighted. The law of separation was never applied with rigor and the Pope’s appeal contributed to a great rebirth of Catholicism in France on the eve of the First World War. Pius X’s ecclesiastical politics, the opposite of his predecessor’s, represents, in the final analysis, an unappealable historical condemnation of the ralliement.
Leo XIII never professed liberal errors, on the contrary, he explicitly condemned them. The historian, nevertheless, cannot ignore the contradiction between Pope Pecci’s Magisterium and his political and pastoral stance. In the encyclicals Diuturnum illud, Immortale Dei e Libertas, he reiterated and developed the political doctrine of Gregory XVI and Pius IX, but the policy of ralliement contradicted his doctrinal premises. Leo XIII, far from his intentions, encouraged, at the level of praxis, those ideas and tendencies that he condemned on the doctrinal level. If we attribute the significance of a spiritual attitude to the word liberal, of a political tendency to concessions and compromise, we have to conclude that Leo XIII had a liberal spirit. This liberal spirit was manifested principally as an attempt to resolve the problems posed by modernity, through the arms of diplomatic negotiation and compromises, rather than with the intransigence of principles and a political and cultural battle. In this sense, as I have shown in my recent volume Il ralliement di Leone XIII. Il fallimento di un progetto pastorale (Le Lettere, Florence 2014), the principal consequences of ralliement, were of a psychological and cultural order more than a political one. To this strategy the ecclesiastic “Third Party” was called upon, which throughout the 20th century tried to find an intermediate position between modernists and anti-modernists who were contending the issue.
The spirit of ralliement with the modern world has been around for more than a century, and the great temptation to which the Church is exposed to, is still [with us]. In this regard, a Pope of great doctrine such as Leo XIII made a grave error in pastoral strategy. The prophetic strength of St. Pius X is the opposite, in the intimate coherence of his pontificate between evangelical Truth and the life of the Church in the modern world, between theory and praxis, between doctrine and pastoral care, with no yielding to the lures of modernity.
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Monday, December 8, 2014
(Rome) The Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary is inseparable from the connected dogma of the Immaculate Conception, which the Blessed Pope Pius IX. infallibly declared for all believers . The Pope, who was Born on May 13, 1792, Count Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti, proclaimed the dogma on December 8, 1854, which is celebrated by the Catholic Church as a holy day of obligation. The mortal remains of Blessed Pius IX., were translated, conserved in the Roman Basilica of San Lorenzo al Verano (also known as San Lorenzo fuori le mura) in 2011.
Pius IX., whose pontificate lasted from 1846-1878, had a reign that was one of the longest in the history of the Church, had expressed the wish to be buried in the ancient narthex of the Basilica of San Lorenzo fuori le mura built by Pope Pelagius II. (579-590), while the mortal remains of the Pope were solemnly and worthily transferred to the present basilica of Pio X in 1881, although anti-clericals engaged in several attacks on the procession. The united Italy proclaimed in 1859-1870 was then dominated by anti-clerical and Masonic forces. In the pontificate of Pius IX. the Papal States fell in 1870 after more than a thousand years and it was marked by the conquest of Rome by the Italian nationalist movement of the Garibaldian-Piedmontese.
"Strong and Inconvenient" Pope, Why Beatification Has Long Been Delayed
With the beatification of Pope John Paul II., in 2000, the amazing incorrupt body of Pius IX was. reburied in a glass coffin. Already at a first exploration, which took place 80 years after the death of the Pope, they were convinced that the body was completely intact. The remains of the Blessed have since been admitted to the adoring faithful, visible under an altar. Pope Benedict XVI. visited his predecessor, to pray at the grave of the Blessed, whose beatification, after a long tug of war within the church, was made possible as a church political compromise and the Counciliar Pope John XXIII. was beatified.
Since its is the mortal remains of Blessed Pius IX. was translated to one of the monastery cells, he lay on the bed, "as if he were asleep." The reliquary of the Pope was returned by February 7th 2012, on his liturgical memorial to his place in the Basilica again.
Pope of the Marian Dogma and the Defense of the Catholic Doctrine
However, it has not been confirmed that the body is to be removed for a canonical investigation, which is required by the eventual canonization of Pius IX. The late Pope has been generally given little attention. The homepage of the Basilica of San Lorenzo in Verano offers only a few lines that provide information about the pope buried in the Basilica.
Messa in Latino presented the question as to whether we are dealing with an intentional discounting of a "strong and inconvenient" Pope as was already evident before and around the beatification of the Saint in 2000.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
image: Messa in Latino
Trans: Tancred email@example.com
Link to Katholisches...
image: Messa in Latino
Trans: Tancred firstname.lastname@example.org
Link to Katholisches...
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Canonization Without Miracles and Church Politicis -- Capovilla: Says John XXIII. Not the "Sweet-Natured Pope"
|Good Pope John|
(Rome) John XXIII., the Pope who convened the Second Vatican Council and is to be canonized without a miracle in a few days by Pope Francis. He was commonly known in the collective memory as the "good" and "sweet-natured" Pope . In contrast, his personal secretary Loris Capovilla is protesting: "Please, don't call him the good-natured Pope. '"
Capovilla's Elevation to Cardinal in Honor of the Council
Monsignor Loris Capovilla was the personal secretary of John XXIII. during his pontificate. This past February 22nd, Pope Francis made him a cardinal. Capovilla, born in 1915, has become since then the oldest living Cardinal.
He's been 50 years fighting against this appellation of John XXIII., as the "Good Pope" or "sweet-natured Pope," Cardinal Capovilla has been giving a few interviews for the canonization of Pope Roncalli. The figure of John XXIII. says Capovilla, is being overwhelmed by this "good nature", said Capovilla, because Pope Roncalli was "very determined" and had been primarily "for the Church and the world and peace, of great importance. His greatest importance is connected to the Second Vatican Council," said Capovilla in the newspaper Eco di Bergamo.
Johannes XXIV. oder Franziskus?
Again the almost century-old cardinal insisted with particular emphasis, on the similarity between John XXIII. and Pope Francis. Francis reminds people "very" much of Pope Roncalli, says Capovilla. The Argentine cardinal had wanted to call himself for a moment even John XXIV. "Pope Francis and John are very similar. Cardinal Bergoglio had thought to take the name John. He wanted to be the successor of John XXIII. But he also thought of Francis. Then he spoke to the Brazilian Cardinal Damasceno and advised him to adopt a name that speaks for the poor and of poverty. So Bergoglio has opted for Francis. But Pope John was in his thoughts."
Canonizations as Motivated by Church Politics?
Pope Francis, it can also be said, that he very rarely mentions the turning point in history of the Second Vatican Council is a point of distinction. This includes the collection of Cardinal Loris Capovilla on February 22, whose merit it is mainly to have been the secretary of John XXIII. and to have been a tireless exponent of the "epochal significance" of Vatican II. This primarily involves the canonization of John XXIII. on April 27, bypassing the canonically prescribed standards. Two events with which Pope Francis contends in the large intra-church conflict, on the one hand John XXIII and Paul VI., on the other hand, John Paul II and Benedict XVI. The canonization of John XXIII. is ultimately a product of chance in internal Church circles, which is directly related to the canonization of John Paul II.
The no Longer Preventable Raising of John Paul II to the Altars
Shortly after Cardinal Bergoglio was elected Pope, the Congregation of Saints convened on the 2nd of July, 2013 to acknowledge the miracle that paved the way for the canonization of the Polish Pope. The schedule was at the time of the election already fixed. This was only a formality, since the examination and approval of the miracle had already taken place by both medical as well as theological side. Thus, it was clear that the canonization would take place within a year. Only an administrative act by the new pope, would have been able to prevent what would, however, his opposition in substantial parts of the church, and not only of Poland would have been introduced with the John Paul II as a reference point. The idea that he of all people should raise John Paul II to the altars is a visible gain in the validity of his understanding of the Church seems not to have been savored by the Argentine Pope.
Causa Johannes XXIII.: Neutralize the "Poles" Canonize the Council
So Pope Francis quickly placed it on the agenda of the Congregation of Saints. However, there is for the Roncalli Pope to date, no recognized miracle. When Cardinal Angelo Amato, prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints to Pope Francis went to tell him the decision of the Congregation on the Polish Pope, John Paul II, the new pope also unexpectedly decided to canonize the Council Pope.
How this could happen without a miracle, has been rather met with an ashamed silence in Rome. The official media of the Holy See has never broached the subject and most accredited to the Vatican press journalists have somewhat averted both eyes, because it is the "sweet-natured Pope", who, after all, convened the Council.
Both large Postconciliar "Souls" of the Church Equal? – Only Superficially
On 27 April, in a sense, both big "souls" of the Catholic Church, who represented a contrasting understanding of the Church since the Council, are raised to the altars. Thus the impression. The sarting point, however, was that the canonization of John Paul II was already too advanced at the time of the election of Pope Francis to put it on the back burner still. However, for Pius IX und Pius XII. and Pius XII. this has been the case for decades. The beatification of Pius IX. in 2000 had become possible only in a church-political maneuver. It was wrested in return for the beatification of John XXIII.
The double canonization of popes on April 27, 2014 will go down in the first place as an object lesson ecclesiastically politically motivated decisions in the history of the Church.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Trans: Tancred email@example.com