New Theology

Society Without God?

In assessing the damage bringing Europe and all the world to ruin, Cardinal Pié exhorts his flock and reminds them that man cannot fully remove himself from God’s governance. In trying to foolishly emancipate himself from God, man builds a society which is no society at all. To pretend that such a foolish thing can be achieved is the problem itself. Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (Liberty, Equality and Fraternity) are masonic principles which have permeated the new age. The Pious Statesman elaborates:

The main error, the capital crime of this century is the pretension of withdrawing public society from the government and the law of God… The principle laid at the basis of the whole modern social structure is atheism of the law and of the institutions. Let it be disguised under the names of abstention, neutrality, incompetence or even equal protection, let us even go to the length of denying it by some legislative dispositions for details or by accidental and secondary acts: the principle of the emancipation of the human society from the religious order remains at the bottom of things; it is the essence of what is called the new era.

(Cardinal Pié, Pastoral Works, vol. VII, pp. 3, 100)


The Doctrine of the Faith Must Be Preserved In the Mass

“Just give us the Mass” This is the saying of many lay faithful to their bishops and priests. This was familiar to me, as it so often was my battle cry. With the benefit of time, I have seen the battle unfold before me–closer to home–and realize that the fight is not just about the Mass, but also about the doctrine of the faith. How did we have the Mass and then “lose” it? Before the Novus Ordo (the New Mass), there was the Nouvelle Theologie as properly defined by Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. .The novelties and erroneous teachings of the Nouvelle Theologie came out of the underground where it had been driven by the heavy hand of Humani Generis via Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. to pervade the writings of the council and subsequent forums following the council. Some say the council was good, but cannot account for the confusion ensuing it. To answer, it is quite simple. Paraphrasing the leading Canon Lawyer of the 20th century, Fr. Hesse, God does not require His faithful to be theologians. He merely requires them to use their common sense–their sensus fidelium.  A good council does not produce a document with one or two good paragraphs and then two erroneous paragraphs. From such a document, one theologian cannot say it says one thing, while another argues that it says something else. Truth cannot be balanced in this way. This is mockery of Our Lord, and we cannot be blind to it. Just as we know from sound Theology, an admixture of evil in something good perverts it. It is that simple. If we want to have just the Mass, we will be given just that, but then we will be blind to everything else, including error. it is apt to recall that during the Vatican Council meetings, Chenu, Congar, Schillebeeckx, Rahner and Kung of the Nouvelle Theologie said the Latin Mass while they plotted a revolution at the Vatican Council afterwards. Yes, they too had the Latin Mass, but did they possess the doctrine? No, they did not. If a priest wittingly or unwittingly promotes ambiguous and erroneous doctrine from the pulpit during the Latin Mass, then he is aiding in the destruction of the faithful and of the Church. Let us not just fight for the Mass, but also the doctrine. The Pious Statesman–Cardinal Pie–was dedicated to fighting against the ideas which we are shamelessly embracing today. Before Pope Pius X, there was Cardinal Pie. He was the fire that animated the writings of the Good Pope. On the occasion of the fifteenth anniversary of his episcopal consecration in 1878, Cardinal Pie admonishes us:

Have you not often been saddened, and taken fright, my venerable brothers, on hearing the language of certain men, who believe themselves still to be sons of the Church, men who still practice occasionally as Catholics and who often approach the Lord’s Table? Do you still believe them to be sons, do you still believe them to be members of the Church, those who, wrapping themselves in such vague phrases as modern aspirations and the force of progress and civilization, proclaim the existence of a “consciousness of the laity,” of a secular and political conscience opposed to the “conscience of the Church,” against which they assume the right to react, for its correction and renewal? Ah! So many passengers, and even pilots, who, believing themselves to be yet in the barque, and playing with profane novelties and the lying science of their time, have already sunk and are in the abyss. -Works of the Cardinal Pie, Bishop of Poitiers, Chapter VII, p.68