In his well-written, extensively footnoted, and most excellent book, “The Second Vatican Council: An Unwritten Story,” Professor Roberto de Mattei shared some information that casts serious doubt on Pope John XIII’s contention that the idea of an ecumenical council came to him suddenly and directly from the Holy Spirit.
Addressing the Council Fathers on October 11, 1962, the Council’s opening day, Pope John said:
“We uttered those words [‘Ecumenical Council’] in the presence of the Sacred College of Cardinals on that memorable January 25, 1959, the feast of the Conversion of St. Paul, in the basilica dedicated to him. It was completely unexpected, like a flash of heavenly light, shedding sweetness in eyes and hearts.”
Later that year, in a private journal entry dated September 16, and presented in the above referenced book (pg. 92), Pope John writes “I was the first to be surprised at my proposal.”
And yet, also referenced by Professor de Mattei (pg. 87) is a conversation that allegedly took place between Dom Lambert Beauduin, a close friend of Cardinal Angelo Roncalli, and his disciple, Roger Poelman, as the pontificate of Pope Pius XII had yet to come to a close.
As recalled by Poelman, Beauduin assured him, “He [Pius XII] will die very soon. His successor will be Roncalli … You will see. He will hold a council and will do so in an ecumenical perspective.”
Setting aside Dom Beauduin’s accuracy in predicting that Angelo Roncalli would be elected Pius’ successor, how could he be so certain that a council would be convened if indeed his close friend was chosen? Surely they had spoken about this previously, no?
Professor de Mattei offers yet another interesting reference (pg. 96) in an excerpt from the Italian Weekly, Epoca, wherein Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani was interviewed about the recently announced council.
He [Roncalli] had spoken about it to me from the moment of his election. Or, rather, to be more precise, it was I who visited him in his little room at the conclave on the eve of the election. Among other things, I told him, “Your Eminence, it is necessary to think about a council.” Cardinal Ruffini, who was present at the conversation, was of the same mind. Cardinal Roncalli adopted this idea and later had this to say, “I have thought of a council from the moment when I became pope.”
So, from where did this story about the Holy Spirit inspiring the Council “like a flash of Heavenly light” come?
Professor de Mattei shares yet another excerpt from the journal of Pope John XXIII (pg. 92) wherein the Holy Father writes of an event (recorded on two different dates; January 15 and 20,1959, prior to making the big announcement):
In an audience with Secretary of State Tardini, for the first time, and, I would say, as though by chance, I happened to mention the word “council,” as if to say what the new pope could propose as an invitation to an enormous movement of spirituality for Holy Church and for the world … “Oh! Oh? That’s an idea, right?” [Tardini replied.] (Jan. 20, 1959)
In the January 15th entry, John XXIII recorded Cardinal Tardini’s response as, “Oh! This is a luminous and holy idea. It comes right from heaven…” [Emphasis added.]
Apparently, Pope John XXIII liked the sound of that, but did it really?
In the Cardinal Krol Chronicles, Ottaviani’s prompting of Pope John to open a Council was explained.
Ottaviani saw a twin threat coming at the Church from the Communists on the one hand and the Americanists on the other.
Well, at least they got those two items taken care of! I mean, um, right? 🙁
What are the Cardinal Krol Chronicles?
The Second Vatican Council may have been inspired by a “spirit”, but it wasn’t the “Holy” one!
“By the fruits, you will know them.”
Agreed. I believe that the real Spirit of the Council is none other than the devil himself.
“Only one offense is now vigorously punished – an accurate observance of our fathers’ traditions. For this cause the pious are driven from their countries, and transported into deserts.”
-St. Basil
———
“The Church has not just recently been given order and statutes. They were faithfully and soundly bestowed on it by the Fathers. Nor has the faith only just been established, but it has come to us from the Lord through His disciples. May what has been preserved in the Churches from the beginning to the present day not be abandoned in our time; may what has been entrusted into our keeping not be embezzled by us. Brethren, as custodians of God’s mysteries, let yourselves be roused into action on seeing all this despoiled by others.”
-St. Athanasius, cited here: http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Apologia/Vol_one/Appendix_I.htm
———
“The Catholic world in the West today finds itself in a state of accelerating disintegration but for the most part does not groan and certainly does not seem amazed. Indeed, most of the bishops repeat ad nauseum that things have never been better, that we are living in the most flourishing period of the Church’s history. A bishop like the late Mgr. R. J. Dwyer, of Portland, Oregon, who had the courage to speak out and describe the situation in the Church as it really is was looked upon as an eccentric, as a crank, as a trouble-maker.”
-Michael Davies, Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre, http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Apologia/Vol_one/Appendix_I.htm
Thanks for that quote from St. Athanasius especially on his feast day. Action is what is called for. We have had 50 years of talk. I do believe nothing happens by accident whether political or ecclesiastical. The moment was ripe after PPXII died. It seems that Roncalli was already primed for it. Judging by the confusing conclave, so were those who planned it. Of course, Fatima played her part for the 1960 3rd secret which probably was the warning of what was to happen to the Church. Maybe it is time to nail another thesis on someone’s door. It seemed to have worked the first time.
A bit of fluff to sell the product. A bit of VII branding, I would say – ‘see, sheeple, VII was inspired, sudden, not planned for over a decade in earnest and had not been cultivated in secret for most of the 20th century. JXXIII was responsible for the Vatican-Moscow agreement – the ‘detente’ with the devil – I wonder ‘who’ inspired that? It would seem that Roncalli and, indeed, a lot of fruits from vii have been inspired by something. That “the Catholic world in the West today finds itself in a state of accelerating disintegration but for the most part does not groan and certainly does not seem amazed”, is an evil fruit (thanks for the Archbishop Lefebvre quote, Alphonsus) and our Lord makes it plain how we shall know – by the fruits.
for a giggle:
–
http://mundabor.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/modern-warships/
Here is another piece evidence to destroy the myth of the “sudden inspiration by the Holy Ghost to convene the council” (and as the below article rightly points out, impulsivity in a pope is not a virtue):
–
Desmond O’Grady, former Vatican correspondent for the Washington Post, reported that while stationed in Istanbul in 1944 Roncalli “gave a sermon on a council to be held in the postwar period.”
–
http://www.americancatholic.org/messenger/nov1996/feature1.asp
Edu, I don’t see that quote anywhere in the article you linked. I do, however, see a lot of reeking garbage written by Desmond O’Grady, For example:
“Why is Pius X, whose purge against modernism created an anti-intellectual climate and many victims, recognized as a saint…”
Or how about this? “This is exemplified by Pius IX (1846-1878) who, on his election, was welcomed as open-minded but later acquired a reputation as a reactionary, largely because of the Syllabus of Errors. Among other things the Syllabus condemned religious freedom.”
But no surprise there, this is the St. Anthony Messenger, organ of the Franciscan space cadets, where “it’s all good” and invincible heretical arrogance and stupidity reign.
It struck me that I had not heard much about the other side of PJXXIII. So I went in and googled the “Devil’s Advocate”. All you guys already know I am sure, but it was a surprise to me to learn that that office was suppressed back in 1983 by PJPII. Surprise, surprise! In the process I found another quote from the present Pontiff which read, “And I believe in God, not in a Catholic God, there is no Catholic God, there is God and I believe in Jesus Christ, his incarnation. Jesus is my teacher and my pastor, but God, the Father, Abba, is the light and the Creator. This is my Being.” I guess that takes care of both creeds.
Fr. Luigi Villa, in his “John XXIII Beatified?,” says that he was considering calling a council even before his election!
I’m not defending the article or the author, but if you look more carefully in the article you will see reproduced the words in between the quotation marks I indicated. I’m just providing another piece of evidence among others showing how the idea of the council didn’t come out of thin air in 1958-1959.
Excellent piece by Christopher Ferrara:
–
“What is a Traditionalist?”
–
http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/601-what-exactly-is-a-traditionalist
The marixst ‘canonisations’ would attract marxist hooligans:
–
http://romancatholicworld.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/robert-mugabe-is-welcomed-in-the-vatican/
interesting ‘five wounds’/five vii popes (excluding the 33 day pope) talk:
–
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrOS-hLi9FM
Read nothing “Catholic” beyond 1955 — watch this as a prelude to reading the entire book. Protect the children from public schools and priests who celebrate both what is diabolically referred to as the “Ordinary Form,’ while also celebrating the ancient Rite. Pray, sacrifice and offer suffering for such. The Novus Ordo in an oh so subtle most Luciferian way, changes a man. Protect children from JPII’s “Theology of the Body.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxz07a8JFKs
We as good Catholics are basically barking but not biting. We sit back and keep imploring each other to pray….and yet things keep getting worse and more and more souls are going to hell. Unless the popes who stood behind the crusades were wrong, then maybe our modern day approach at trying to change things is total BS. We need a serious uprising…..the passive approach does nothing.
Dear Rich,
–
I totally sympathize with your point of view. However, the sad reality is that the true Christian forces are far too few in number and many of them too weak to make an effective stand against the forces of the world. Like the Christians of the early centuries leading to the edict of Milan by Constantine, the only thing we have left is each other’s prayers, sacrifices and support.
–
I am not a pacifist by any means. If the Christian forces were sufficiently numerous, I would be the first to sign up for a Christian crusade, much like the nationalist forces in Spain fighting againt the reds during the Spanish civil war. But those days are gone.
–
Only a direct divine intervention can now save us from the present calamity. (cf Revelation 19:11-21)
Rich, I am in total agreement with you. It is time to circle the wagons of the truths of our faith around our Holy Mother, the Church. Success of our efforts is in God’s hands, but I do believe it is time for debate with the Roman church to begin. I am one who sees the future very pessimistically at this point. The modernists backed by their masons have the high ground of public opinion and the show of seeming authority. The odds are certainly not in favor of the Traditionalists and conservative souls of the Church. We are God’s remnant now. Only the truth will set us and all suffering souls free. I await the announcement from Vatican that all clerical ordinations are invalid since 1969 from PPVI. Therefore, there is no longer a priesthood, and that is just what they always wanted. The Romans did it to the Jewish priesthood. The “Roman” Masons will do it to ours now. 2,000 years of meticulous detail to apostolic succession, down in flames in 50 years. Keep in mind this present Pontiff was ordained to the priesthood and the episcopacy after 1969 changes too.
Rich, if we are going to carry out a Crusade, it should be for the Consecration of Russia as requested by Our Lady. That is the only battle that needs to be fought, as it will supernaturally overthrow the Masonic occupation of the Church.
Rich and rcaamo, have you been praying the Rosary for the intentions of the SSPX rosary crusade? I know the ‘counted prayers’ have been scoffed at by the Holy Father, and I know some do not like the SSPX, but it can only be helpful to join in that crusade, uniting your voices and prayers with the other faithful souls. That is true unity, and a true force to be reckoned with! The Blessed Virgin will appreciate that massive bouquet of Aves, even if HH does not. The crusade continues until Pentecost, so consider counting your rosaries and offering them for that intention if you have not been doing it so far.
My understanding is that there were two stories going the rounds:
.
1. Vatican II as a more or less sudden inspiration, shortly after the new Pope’s election;
2. Vatican II as having been suggested some time earlier, in view of the changed circumstances of modern life; especially as Pius XI had not been able, in 1923, to continue and conclude the work of Vatican I.
.
Since the last regularly completed council was Trent in 1564, ISTM that to call an Ecumenical Council was entirely justified. Not that Vatican I doesn’t count, but only four of its sessions were concluded – the rest of its intended work was not done.
FWIW, I don’t see why the idea of holding V2 can’t have been a genuine Divine inspiration – that it turned out as it did, was dependent on (among other things) the free choices of those involved. Maybe we should avoid thinking of the impulse to hold it as so connected with what in fact occurred, as to treat them as identical. They are related, to be sure – but how the Council turned out, is not logically dependent upon whether the idea of calling it was a good idea.
Thank you for that heads up. Prayer has been and is even more than ever the flame that will ignite the furnace of love within in the Church. No I did not know of this crusade and have already looked into the site for SSPX. There is no hope for us without prayer.
Hi Louie. This is VERY IMPORTANT!!! I found this video a few months ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03da9ehnwkU
It is a video of a talk by Fr. Thomas Stransky about Nostra Aetate. He was part of the “Ecumenism” group headed by Cardinal Bea. It is very revealing. I get the impression that this was a “clandestine” effort that had the full support of John XXIII. I think this is where the revolutionary core of Vatican II was planned. It seems to me that John XXIII did not want to be closely associated with this effort, so he made it seem as if Cardinal Bea was acting “independently”. John XXIII told the the group that the fact that the “Ecumenism” group was working on Catholic-Jewish relations was to be kept a “secret”.
Fr. Thomas Stransky gave another version of this same talk at Georgetown which is available here:
http://www.georgetown.edu/vatican-II-dialogue.html
However, this is a “white-washed” version. Stil since I know of your deep interest in Vatican II, you will absolutely want to visit the Georgetown site because it provides very interesting background on VII (from a liberal Jesuit perspective).
It’s the feast – 5 May (previi) of Pope St Pius V:
–
http://www.fathercekada.com/2014/05/04/a-hymn-to-st-pius-v-saint-of-the-mass/
–
St. Pius V, oro pro nobis.
Both approaches are active. Think Lepanto. To state that a prayerful approach by Catholic faithful is passive is founded in error.
Bl. Jacinta, ora pro nobis.
That’s what we keep sayin’ ! Traditional Catholics? Trads? Traddies? Sourpusses? Creed reciting? No, we’re just Catholics. Period.
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/601-what-exactly-is-a-traditionalist
(Commemortion – Pope Saint Pius V)
O God,
Who when Thou wast pleased to break the teeth of them that hate thy Church, and to restore again the solemn worship of thyself, didst choose the blessed Pope Pius to work for thee in that matter, grant that he may still be a tower of strength for us grant that we also may be more than conquerors over all that make war upon our souls, and in the end may enter into perfect peace in thy presence.Through Jesus Christ, thy Son our Lord, Who liveth and reigneth with thee, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, ever one God, world without end.
Amen.
Jimmy,
If VII had been called for the purpose of combating and anathematizing heresy, like ever other Council in the history of the Church, then we could probably state with confidence that it was indeed a result of Divine inspiration. However, it was called for the sole purpose of “updating,” modernizing,” “opening the windows,” aggiornamento,” etc. – none of which the Church, which was flourishing at the time, needed, or ever needs, for that matter. So this Council was launched under heretical humanistic pretenses by a disoriented Pope (disoriented because he refused to reveal the Third Secret and to perform the Consecration of Russia). The kernel of its heretical thought lay in the work of the newly formed “Secretariat for Christian Unity,” within which the heresy of “ecumenism” was hatched, along with the overtures to the Jews launched by Cardinal Bea, a Jesuit and a liberal (and Pius XII’s Confessor, I believe! Did Pius know what Bea was??)
Obviously, the point of this issue and the debate concerning it can go on and on. I was born in 1945 and I am fortunate enough to have witnessed the Church after 500 years from the reformation. I don’t know what the situation was in Europe, I was in Harlem and I treasure those memories and the gifts of having been there and experienced the Church so dedicated. I was a child, but I was alert enough to recognize success and grace. Whatever the reason or the cause for VII, I can find no way that it is an improvement from what I do remember. So I find it difficult to think that this was the result of the a sudden inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It may take us another 500 years to attempt to correct the errors of the past 50.
on making schmaints of ‘good men’ who are bad fathers:
–
“What would you say of a father of family who would be most pious, give alms, and devoted to the care of the needy, and yet, would neglect the education of his children, disinterest himself of whom they mix with, would be always away from home, letting anyone come in with no care for the good of the family? Could this father be given as a model? No! He would have neglected his duties of fatherhood.”
–
http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/good-men-perhaps-poor-fathers-3992
excellent, my dear salvemur,
thank you for this.
dear rcaamo,
you are part of those whom I call the walking wounded. Thank you for telling a bit about your experience within a healthier Catholic world. May the Peace of His Majesty Our Lord Jesus Christ, a Peace not of this world, be to you.
For those who missed the story over at RC, another one bites the dust. N.O. Order selling seminary. Link here:
http://www.cbre.us/o/washingtondc/properties/st-pauls-college/Pages/st-pauls-college.aspx
—-
“I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in me that bears no fruit he cuts away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes to make it bear even more. You are clean already, by means of the word that I have spoken to you. Remain in me, as I in you. As a branch cannot bear fruit all by itself, unless it remains part of the vine, neither can you unless you remain in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me, with me in him, bears fruit in plenty; for cut off from me you can do nothing. Anyone who does not remain in me is thrown away like a branch — and withers; these branches are collected and thrown on the fire and are burnt. If you remain in me and my words remain in you, you may ask for whatever you please and you will get it. It is to the glory of my Father that you should bear much fruit and be my disciples. I have loved you just as the Father has loved me. Remain in my love. If you keep my commandments you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and remain in his love.”
John 15:1-10
—–
RC:
“Following the Second Vatican Council, the Paulist Fathers and the order’s Paulist Press shifted their focus toward “ecumenical and interfaith efforts” and “Jewish-Christian dialogue.” In recent decades, Paulists have identified with the far left.
One-hundred years after the founding of the seminary, a real estate website lists it for sale.”
I know, dear S. Armaticus.
Yesterday I was updating on the progress of the new SSPX seminary construction in Virginia. Needed is enough benefactor funds to complete the roof by Winter 2014-15 in order that interior building can proceed uninterrupted. With numbers now burgeoning, one thinks of events in October to increase those numbers. Let us add this intention to our {counted, of course, you know how we legalists are ,} Rosaries
What a gorgeous place! I would love to have seen their chapel. I am familiar with upstate NY, and we too saw a number of seminaries close in a short time. It is unfortunate that SS{X could not pick up one of these. I am sure they are going at a very good price and as soon as possible. I have been to a number of those seminaries, and they did speak tremendously of the blessing of the Church back then. Maryknoll itself was producing 100 priests a year. Michael Voris spoke of patience in the Church last night. It sounds like the advice given by the crew on the Titanic. Of course, we all know which iceberg we hit back in the 60s.
Fr. Thomas Stransky who I mentioned above as one of the conspirators that helped push ecumenism through at Vatican II was “President” of the Paulist Fathers from 1970-1978. Seminary closed… mission accomplished.
Yes, he was the “President” before that the proper term of “Superior General” was used. You can see a list of “Presidents and Superior Generals” of the Paulists here:
http://www.paulist.org/history/paulist-presidents-and-superiors-general
The founder and first Superior General was Father Isaac T. Hecker. In case you don’t know he was at the center of the Americanism heresy that Pope Leo XIII condemned.
Hecker was a convert to Catholicism. Prior to his conversion he was part of the trancendentilist “Brook Farm movement” which was basically a 19th century version of the peace-love hippy movement.
I’ve often wondered if he wasn’t so much a convert to Catholicism as an infiltrator.
I have a feeling he would be very pleased with the way that Vatican II “transcended” the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church. And I also have a feeling he wouldn’t be at all upset by the closing of the seminary…. mission accomplished.
Here is a link to the Wiki article on Isaac Hecker:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Hecker
It is well worth a read. It will give you a taste of the Americanists roots of Vatican II.
that’s a good point. October probably will increase numbers of the Faithful in the SSPX, because the way things are shaping up with the rhetoric and phone calls from Rome, it seems unlikely that these prelates will uphold the the Truth, unless they have a Damascus moment, but even if they did they would probably ‘interpret’ is a neo-modernist manner whereby they could remain saul and keep persecuting Christians.
more antidote against the poison of neo-madness:
–
http://mundabor.wordpress.com/2014/05/07/a-tale-of-two-buildings
It is my understanding that charity is not really charity if it is not bound with Truth. So, exactly what is ‘charity’ these days? Novus Ordo charity seems to be little more than being a fan of whoever is in ‘charge’, and ostracising those who aren’t really into checking the Truth at the door when they go to Mass, or listen to the pope or see the world and the new church for what it is – full of sympathy for the devil – a complete lack of charity for immortal souls.
–
Excellent Remnant video on ‘charity’.
–
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfbHq67u2xY&feature=youtu.be
p.s. but since the very concept of an immortal soul and her importance is no longer something concerning Catholics, i guess the charity of truth is passé.
Salvemur,
–
I wish Mr Matt had shown more charity for those souls still uncertain about the legitimacy of the recent canonizations by telling people clearly and plainly that they were not to be considered valid and were nothing more than an attempt to canonize vatican II (pretty much what “Fr” Barren said in one of his videos). Instead, he posted on his site an article defending the legitimacy of the canonizations with the absurd and ridiculous “St Dismas” theory – whereby JP II is a “saint” DESPITE the fact that he was a public sinner, as if the issue of the two people in question has anything in common.
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/578-advice-on-surviving-the-canonizations
Moreover, the absurd “real council versus council of the media” proposition by B XVI was rightly debunked by Louie in “Voice of Catholic Tradition”. I think it is one of the more recent of the interviews here:
http://www.voiceofcatholicradio.com/catholicradiowebpage_018.htm
yeah, that was a sigh and go and have a drink moment. you could see the Remnant struggling to fit the concept of ‘valid’ and ‘saint’ together with the facts that both were poor promulgators and protectors of Truth. But it sounded and hollow – it just is hollow. with the upcoming ‘beati’ of paul vi it is getting even more hollow. It’s like a holl[ow]ywood event where all the same people who perpetrated the rotten movie congratulate themselves for doing so and then make a movie demonizing those who can see what a sham it is.