|Triumph of the Modernists: Our Lady smashed to pieces in Rome|
The younger people in the Church today who have begun blogs and web sites rightly look upon this with horror and disgust. These websites and blogs, very good and sound ones, are clearly run by people whose eyes are being opened to Episcopal treachery in ways many of us old folks have seen developing for forty years. The information now available on anyone's computer has made the treason of the clerics manifest much more quickly than in the "old days" when all we had were newspaper reports and the television.
But we old-timers did have a few fine sources available to us, one of them being the late Hamish Fraser's periodical out of Scotland, Approaches. It was in print from the mid-1960s to the time of his death in November of 1985. Fraser had worldwide sources of information, his writing was excellent and he had a love for the Church like few others. He was furthermore a fearless defender of the Catholic Faith.
Fraser watched the schism develop over the years following the Second Vatican Council, although he was well aware that its roots went back to the mid-19th century. To get a better understanding, or at least a historical perspective about where we find ourselves right now, a reading of Fraser's works is a solid vehicle. In the Ash Wednesday, 1984 issue of Approaches Fraser takes another look at the menace of the modern schism, or more properly the Modernist heresy, and we here at The Eye Witness believe you will find his thoughts most interesting.
In discussing the origins of the current schismatic drift and in recalling the words of Cardinal Gagnon that warned of this drift he writes:
"Nor did this state of 'material schism' begin with Pope John Paul II. It first became sensationally manifest in the immediate wake of Humanae Vitae to which various national episcopal conferences reacted by making clear that the Encyclical's teaching could be disregarded in practice.
The episcopal formula by means of which Humanae Vitae was defied by the then (1968) most dissident episcopal conferences - France, Canada, Germany, Belgium, Mexico, Scandinavia etc. - was that the encyclical would be interpreted 'pastorally' [sound familiar? Editor, The Eye Witness] and with full respect for 'the primacy of conscience'.
However, since the Bishops involved refused to make it clear to their flocks that, as Catholics, they have the inescapable duty of informing their consciences as to what always has been, still is, and always will be the authentic moral teaching of the Universal Church; since on the contrary they gave the impression that Catholics are free to obey or disobey even the infallible teaching of the Ordinary Pontifical Magisterium (as exemplified by Humanae Vitae's teaching concerning contraception), these Bishops not only presented 'primacy of conscience' in absurd caricature; by doing so they also made it clear that they themselves were in schism with the authentic Pontifical Magisterium,
If this was not immediately obvious it was because, instead of condemning or disciplining such bishops, Paul VI accepted their defiance without demur, even going so far as to commend the pastoral solicitude of the most outstanding 'material schismatics', such as the episcopates of France and Canada.
Moreover, whereas he proceeded to suppress the Mass of all time by a most savage abuse of authority, and to impose in its stead the valid but Protestantizing Novus Ordo Missae, the same Pontiff did nothing whatever to implement the teaching of Humanae Vitae. And in this respect, as also in respect of his suppressing the unequivocally Catholic Mass, Paul VI was himself to that extent also in schism with the authentic Pontifical Magisterium which it was his duty to defend and uphold.
Such papal behaviour could not but have disastrous consequences. In particular, even such episcopal conferences as had initially demonstrated exemplary obedience in the wake of Humanae Vitae - particularly those of Scotland and Ireland - soon capitulated to the 'pastoral' consensus of the more dissident hierarchies. Consequently, the 'people of God' as a whole were soon dragged into 'material schism' with Rome, which resulted in a plummeting birth rate which derives from the fact that the immense majority of Catholic women of child-bearing age no longer respect the Church's moral teaching.
That this sad state of affairs derives from 'material schism' is quite incontrovertible. The simple truth is that with a few - very few - outstanding exceptions, nothing has been taught concerning the Church's authentic moral teaching for two decades."
It is easy to see, therefore, why we are where we are today. The battle for the soul of the Church began over 150 years ago with the rise of Modernism, and its offshoots like Americanism. The progression is clear. Once doubt was cast on the fact that the Church's teachings derived from Christ Himself, once the necessity of belonging to the one, true Church for salvation began to be doubted or outright discarded, it was only simply a matter of time before we would have to face Churchmen like Cardinal Kasper and his ilk.
Nor, as Fraser shows, can Popes be free from criticism.
"No useful purpose can possibly be served by ignoring or playing down the more unacceptable features of the present pontificate [He is of course referring to John Paul II], on the pretext of fidelity to the See of Peter. For true fidelity to the Pope is quite incompatible with silence concerning papal acts or omissions which undermine papal authority.
It must be said that the current increasing trend towards sedevacantism would cease overnight were John Paul II unequivocally to reaffirm the consistent and infallible teaching of his predecessors concerning the unique character of the One True Church. For sedecavantism is rooted in the suspicion that even the more acceptable features of the present pontificate may constitute mere bait to induce the swallowing of what is unacceptable - in much the same way as the gratitude and joy of orthodox Catholics in respect of Humanae Vitae served to distract their attention and divide them when, a year later, they had to reckon with the imposition of the Protestantizing Novus Ordo Missae by an unprecedented combination of guile and savagery".
We here recently wrote that many of the underhanded machinations that were in play in 1968 were trotted out once again with respect to the October Synod jamboree last October. And many of the same tools and buzzwords used by the Vatican II crowd were brought back for this Synod. The difference is that during the Council and during the New Mass debacle there was no such thing as a willing, courageous Catholic media backlash as we have today. And this is obviously the reason why good, orthodox Cardinals (yes, there are a few left) are getting shuffled off to Siberia or having poison pen campaigns instituted against them, and why good Catholic bloggers like my friend Vox Cantoris is being harassed by one of the Vatican's yes men.
Hamish Fraser, not to mention his good son Tony, whose death a few months ago I have still not recovered from, had a good deal to say about the rot that was setting in to holy Church. I salute them every day and I will continue to delve into their writings and bring as many of them to my readers as I can.
The Frasers reported what was coming. Now we see how right they were.