Interview with biographer of Pere Calmel, Dominican defender of Catholic Tradition

Fr. Roger-Thomas Calmel, O.P. (1914-1975), was a prominent French Dominican and Thomist philosopher, who made an immense contribution to the fight for Catholic Tradition through his writings and conferences. Here is a video interview with his Dominican biographer, Père Jean-Dominique Fabre, O.P.


Related: Père Jean-Dominique Fabre, O.P., Le Père Roger-Thomas Calmel (Clovis editions)

"Liturgical Counter-Revolution: The 'hushed' case of Fr. Calmel" (ConcilioVaticanoSecondo.it, February 17, 2014).

Some quotations from the Père Roger-Thomas Almel, O.P." Facebook page [disclaimer: Rules 7-9]:

• Modernism makes its victims walk under the banner of obedience, placing under the suspicion of pride any criticism whatsoever of the reforms [Vatican II], in the name of the respect which one owes to the pope, in the name of missionary zeal, of charity and of unity."
  
  
• "Tradition Will Triumph. We are at peace on this point. Whatever may be the hypocritical arms placed by modernism in the hands of the episcopal collegialities and even of the vicar of Christ, tradition will indeed triumph: solemn baptism, for example, which includes the anathemas against the accursed devil will not be excluded for long; the tradition of not absolving sins except after individual confession will not be excluded for long; the tradition of the traditional Catholic Mass, Latin and Gregorian, with the language, Canon and gestures in conformity with the Roman Missal of St. Pius V, will soon be restored to honor; the tradition of the Catechism of Trent, or of a manual exactly in conformity with it, will be restored without delay.
  
  On the major points of dogma, morals, the sacraments, the states of life, the perfection to which we are called, the tradition of the Church is known by the members of the Church whatever their rank. They hold fast to it without a bad conscience, even if the hierarchical guardians of this tradition try to intimidate them or throw them into confusion; even if they persecute them with the bitter refinements of modernist inquisitors. They are very assured that by keeping the tradition they do not cut themselves off from the visible vicar of Christ. For the visible vicar of Christ is governed by Christ in such wise that he cannot transmute the tradition of the Church, nor make it fall into oblivion. If by misfortune he should try to do it, either he or his immediate successors will be obliged to proclaim from on high what remains forever living in the Church's memory: the Apostolic tradition. The spouse of Christ stands no chance of losing her memory."
  
  
• "There is no evolution in dogma, only perversion. The Bride of Christ never loses Her memory."
  
  
• "The Virgin, Mother of God, the Virgin of the Stabat, of the Pentecost and of the miraculous intervention throughout history, the Virtin Mary coredemptrix will keep safe in the Holy Church not only the data instituted by the Lord but also the means from ecclesiastical origin by which the Spouse of Christ will unswervingly stand in the middle of men, both as mediator of salvation and home where God dwells, until the eternal day of the Parousia of our Beloved Savior."
  
  
• "The only authentic and saving encounter of the church with the world is that of the Confessors without stain, of the inflexible Doctors, of the faithful Virgins and of the invincible Martyrs, covered in the red tunic colored by the blood of the Lamb. ... We must separate ourselves from the world when we are not able to do as the world wishes without offending Christ."
  
  
• "No one in the Church, whatever his hierarchical rank, be it ever so high, no one has the power to change the Church or the Apostolic Tradition."
  
  
• "In the Catholic Mass, the priest does not preside in just any manner; he is marked with a divine character which sets him apart for all eternity and thus he acts as the minister of Christ, who performs the Mass through him; he couldnever be likened to a Protestant minister, who is delegated by the faithful to ensure the good order of the assembly. This role is obvious in the rite of Mass established by St. Pius V; it is obscured if not suppressed entirely in the new rite."
• "Some object that ... efeining and condemning is not the right method. Very well. Is there any other method that is true to the faith? In the absence of definitions you will only bring erring souls to a vague state of almost-believing. I fail to see how you can claim to be pastoral in this way, and to be seeking the good of sould -- truth for the mind, and conversion for the heart."
  
  
• "Our Lord in His church is in His death-throes ... in His death-throes because His Church is being buffeted, hindered, obstructed and resisted from within in Her prime task of bringing the Redemption to souls. Not that She is about to disappear, because the gates of hell will not prevail against Her, but that Her own sons, and amongst them leadrs of the hierarchy, are mistreating Her in so vile and wicked a fashion that She can no longer move without crashing to the ground at each step, fainting with exhaustion."
  
  
• "Why the Latin Mass ONLY? ... to receive, without risk of being deceived, the incarnate and immolated Word of God rendered truly present under the Sacred Species."
  
  
• "The Modernist is an apostate and a traitor."
  
  
• "The simple Christian who, consulting tradition on a major point known to all, would refuse to follow a priest, a bishop, an episcopal conference, or even a Pope who would ruin tradition on this point, would not, as some charge, be showing signs characteristic of private judgment or pride; for it is not pride or insubordination to discern what the tradition is on major points, or to refuse to betray them ... is not exercising private judgment; he is not a rebel. He is a faithful Catholic established in a tradition that comes from the Apostles and which no one in the Church can change. For no one in the Church, whatever his hierarchical rank, be it ever so high, no one has the power to change the Church or the Apostolic tradition."
  
  
• "The Mass belongs to the Church. The new Mass belongs only to modernism. I hold to the Mass which is Catholic, traditional, Gregorian, because it does not belong to Modernism.... Modernism is a virus. It is contagious and one must flee from it. The witness is complete. If I give witness to the Catholic Mass, it is necessary that I abstain from celebrating any other Mass. It is like the burnt incense before the idols: either one grain or nothing. Therefore, nothing."

[Hat tip to Sir A.S.]

Fr. Perrone: this is no time for oblivion or indolence

Father Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" (Assumption Grotto News, June 28, 2015): 

I wonder how cognizant people are about the true state of things at this time. My guess is that they are not much aware, or at least not all that much troubled by them. I’ve avoided apocalyptic warnings to you for the good reason that they would be false. Only God knows for sure when the travail of the final days will be upon us. This does not mean, however, that there cannot be a time great turmoil in the world–a time of disturbances which afflict the entire societal body in the political, moral, and religious areas of life–which is to say, in every aspect. 

The near collapse of order in beneficent government, national and worldwide, in societal structures, in education, the military, in law and judiciary, in education and arts, in economy and–hard to admit it–even in the Church, does not seem overmuch to worry many people, because they’ve been lulled into reverie by an enveloping, all-pervading sensuality. The palliative effect of pleasures which distract our minds and cloud our judgment tends to make us oblivious to the disorder all around us: the effect being much like an anaesthetic on a body suffering some pathological condition. Pain is a warning that something’s amiss that needs remedying. Covering over problems with blithe distractions from sensual comforts allows decay unattended to advance, to worsen. 

Men’s ambition and pride lead to resentment of authority; their inclination towards evil, and especially towards sexual indulgence, leads them to want to give way to outpourings of their lawless passions (anger, lust and disregard for law and discipline); and these in turn make men turn away from God and prepare them to become practical atheists, which is to say, agnostics. It is only at this last phase that we begin to see clearly that there’s more than human ambition and weakness behind the ensuing general disorder–that it is demonically inspired. In any case, whether we are willing to believe in the Enemy’s hand in this or not, we are all feeling the effects of the advancing chaos in the disharmony in our marriages and families, in our ineffective educational attempts in our schools, in the squeeze that holds our money and property, in the ever-wider encroachment of big government over more and more aspects of our lives, in the disturbances and discomfort we are feeling by being in a Godless public, in the uncertainty and fears we experience as ominous, impending calamity, in the division in the Church, etc.

Much more needs to be said about these things that can’t be aired here. But my reasons for bringing them up are 1) to assure that all this is not right, is not normal, and is decidedly deadly for continuance in an ordered world; 2) to speculate about what the right response should be in the face of this distorted scene. Responses are basically of two kinds: a) offensive action which seeks to rectify the troubles by opposing the many seducing errors and the moral decay; b) prayer and sacrifice, both for restoration of order and for making reparation for damages already done. These two forms are often posed as being in tension with each other: the ‘direct confrontation approach’ or the more ‘indirect’ and (seemingly) ‘passive.’ In truth, I can’t say that there is an alternative: both are needed. We need front-line fighters and we need prayer-warriors (pardon that gooey expression). What we cannot do is to become idle and numb, indifferent and unconcerned, allowing evil to go unopposed, and thus to advance.

If I am undecided about which of these to recommend to you the more, I would, as your pastor, say at least this much with utter confidence: you must stop your own slinking into the myriad forms of evil that are rotting souls. You simply cannot give way to your passions–which are the internal originators of all the disorder and chaos in society and in the Church. You, in simple terms, have got to oppose the sinful inclinations that induce you to commit your sins. Never mind the terrible things other people are doing, how bad the world is getting, how dizzying the turmoil in the Church. Be saintly, and do not budge from the way of righteousness. Be tough on yourselves and be holy people. The reform of the world begins with you, in your own soul. Then, and only then, should you proceed with your plan of righting the wrongs of others. This program is a version of what our Lord Himself said: remove the plank in your own eye before removing the splinter in the eyes of others.

Don’t mistake my meaning. I am not suggesting that we should not oppose the tremendous evils that are upsetting the God-willed harmony and order of the world and the Church. We must oppose these. Nor am I saying that we should not be making the much-needed Eucharistic holy hours to appease divine justice and petition divine intervention. We, however, must not be hypocrites, outwardly valiant and righteous but inwardly unconverted. What is inexcusable is indolence and apathy and, of course, complicity in the great movement to overthrow the God-given order of truth, goodness, beauty, and holiness, a movement which is not fundamentally a thing but a destructive and malevolent person who rails against God and seeks to frustrate His plans for the salvation of the human race.

Fr. Perrone

P.S. This will be my last Descant for a while as I take my summertime lease for mental and physical refreshment. Fr. John, to whom I confidently entrust your pastoral care, will no doubt graciously supply in my absence.

Rasmussen: "Support Grows for States to Ignore Federal Courts"

Rasmussen Reports, "Support Grows for States to Ignore the Federal Courts" (July 3, 2015).

[Hat tip to D.M.]

A new concordat with the sexual revolution?

R.R. Reno raises a provocative question in this article, "A New Concordat?" (First Things, January 2015). The old concordat, of course, was the one contracted between the Vatican and the Hitler-led German government in 1933. Doubtless there were benign motives at work on the side of the Vatican -- perhaps the fear of being out of step with a rising power that seemed to have history on its side and a desire to secure the Church's survival.

Dietrich von Hildebrand deeply regretted the Church's failure to witness in a clear and forceful way: "Just fourteen days after Hitler's seizure of power, the German bishops had lifted the excommunication that previously had been attached to membership in teh National Socialist Party, including both the SA and the SS." Hildebrand saw the demoralizing implications of the concordat for the faithful: "It must have given Catholics throughout Germany the impression that the Vatican was withdrawing its rejection of National Socialism and of racism -- as if it were possible to be a Catholic and a Nazi at the same time."

Although Hildebrand was friends with Eugenio Pacelli (who became Pius XII) and never criticized him in his memoirs, he looked back upon the period with dismay: "I saw with horror that path some leading Catholics were taking, and I saw how terribly the soon-to-be concluded Concordat wit Hitler was bout to affect the spirit of Catholics, how their inner resistance would be paralyzed by it."

Reno turns from the Church's concordat with Hitler to its more recent seeming accommodations of the sexual revolution. While noting the significant differences, he also notes significant parallels. "The HHS contraception mandate requires church-related institutions to collaborate with the dominant, contraceptive culture of our time, and to do so in a public way. This is why the mandate has been a bone in the throat of Catholic institutions in a way that widespread use of contraceptives among Catholics hasn't." He continues:

As Hildebrand recalls with anguish, although the concordat with Hitler's Germany did not mean the Vatican was endorsing the Nazi regime, it undermined resistance.

The same goes for recognizing gay marriages. As Archbishop Chaput observes in his Erasmus Lecture ["Strangers in a Strange Land"], the public reality of marriage gives its redefinition powerful "sign value." If we negotiate unofficial concordats with same-sex marriage of the sort Creighton [University] has -- not "approving," mind you -- then it's hard to maintain the Church's public identity as a teacher of truths about sex, marriage, and the family that are at odds with the sexual revolution.

Will Catholicism, then, forge a concordat with the sexual revolution? The decision made by Creighton University doesn't tell us very much. Nor does a similar decision made by Notre Dame under somewhat different circumstances. The church is a very large, international, and diverse institution. But we can identify pressures and counterpressures likely to shape Catholicism's response to the new challenges posed by the sexual revolution, at least in the West.

First, then, the pressures to find a modus vivendi. Today, American Catholic institutions like Creighton and Notre Dame are run by upper-middle-class Americans more loyal to their class and its values than to the Catholic Church's historic teachings, which have in any event not been passed down over the past fifty years.

This bourgeois loyalty does not mean Catholic leaders lack faith. But it's existentially painful for them to be out of sync wit dominant opinion. Being pro-gay rights is today's badge of honor. I don't think many Catholics who want to move among the Great and the Good will refuse that badge. The same goes for one of today's god terms: inclusive. It functions like a secret handshake that signals membership in the elite. That will be hard to resist. Moreover, open dissent now brings personal risks. Anyone deemed insufficiently "gay-friendly" faces career obstacles.

The pope himself offers little in the way of encouragement to resist a convenient fusion of Catholic and bourgeois life, an ironic but predictable outcome given the tenor of his papacy so far. He routinely denounces Catholic conservatives as small-minded and warns us not to "obsess" over the issues central to the sexual revolution: abortion, contraception, homosexuality. However one reads his intent in these and other statements, there can be no doubt they provide handy talking points for those who want to capitulate on gay marriage or other aspects of the sexual revolution.

Reno goes on to identify factors that work the other way, including the Bible's opposition to values of the contemporary sexual revolution, and the Church's own institutional ballast. Yet the question he raises undeniably highlights one of the fundamental challenges facing the Church today: to accommodate or to resist, to be of the prevailing sexual culture, or to be against it.

Related: Dietrich von Hildebrand, My Battle Against Hitler: Faith, Truth, and Defiance in the Shadow of the Third Reich(Image, 2014).