Rorate Caeli

Essentially satanical

May I be permitted to repeat that the French revolution is not like anything that was ever witnessed in the world in bygone times. It is essentially satanical. Never will it be wholly extinguished except by the contrary principle, and never will the French people resume their place until they have acknowledged this truth. ...

The greatest mark of respect and of profound esteem that can be shown them [the French noble classes], is to remind them that the French revolution—which they would, no doubt, have redeemed with the last drop of their blood—was, nevertheless, in a great measure their own work. So long as a pure aristocracy (in other words, an aristocracy professing, with enthusiasm, national dogmas) surrounds the throne, it is immoveable, even although it should happen to be filled by weakness or error; but if the baronage becomes apostate, there is no longer any safety for the throne, even if it were occupied by a St. Louis or a Charlemagne; and this is more true as regards France than any other country. By their monstrous alliance with the bad principle during last [18th] century, the French nobility ruined everything.
...

[T]he anti-religious fury of last century against all Christian truths and institutions, was directed against the Holy See. The conspirators were sufficiently aware—they knew, unfortunately, much better than the multitude of well-intentioned men, that Christianity is wholly based upon the Sovereign Pontiff. Against this foundation, therefore, they directed all their efforts. ... [W]ithout the Sovereign Pontiff the whole edifice of Christianity is undermined, and only requires, in order to be utterly demolished, the development of certain circumstances ... .

Meanwhile, facts are not silent. Were Protestants ever known to amuse themselves writing books against the Greek, Nestorian, or Syriac churches, which profess dogmas that Protestantism abhors? They do no such thing. On the contrary, they protect those churches, they compliment them, and show themselves ready to unite with them, always holding as a true ally every enemy of the Holy See. The infidel, on the other hand, laughs at all dissenters, and makes use of them all, quite sure that all, more or less, and each one of them in his way, will forward his great work, the destruction of Christianity.
Joseph de Maistre
Du Pape
[Recess continues.]

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

Wow! This is quite a post! So much food for thought.

3 points that hit me like ton of bricks:

"the French revolution is not like anything that was ever witnessed in the world in bygone times. It is essentially satanical. "

"By their monstrous alliance with the bad principle during last [18th] century, the French nobility ruined everything...."

"[T]he anti-religious fury of last century against all Christian truths and institutions, was directed against the Holy See. The conspirators were sufficiently aware—they knew, unfortunately, much better than the multitude of well-intentioned men, that Christianity is wholly based upon the Sovereign Pontiff. "

This all makes so much sense.

How does one reconcile with prelates who openly stated that Vatican II was the 1789 revolution in the Church.? I understand more and more everyday why those "stubborn" traditionalists have resisted so much.

Barbara

Lee Terry Lovelock-Jemmott said...

So powerful, so true. The Roman Church, the seat of Chritianity is the big bad church, whilst every other church is warm and cuddly ( particularly Eastern churches, Edward Said would characterise this self-flagellation attitude as orientalism ). If only more Catholics were taught and nurtured about The enemies of Christ in his Holy Roman Catholic Church?; then more people would realise the errancy of most of the enlightenment and of all the fascistic revolution known as the French Revolution !

Brian said...

the French revolution is not like anything that was ever witnessed in the world in bygone times. It is essentially satanical


Cardinal Suenens approvingly declared that "Vatican II is the French Revolution of the Church.'" Pope Benedict XVI, when he was a Cardinal, noted that Gaudium et spes "represents on the part of the Church, an attempt at official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789."

http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f009ht_TwoSpirits_Arnold.htm



Père Congar, one of the artisans of the reforms, spoke likewise: “The Church has had, peacefully, its October Revolution.” Fully aware of what he was saying, he remarked “The Declaration on Religious Liberty states the opposite of the Syllabus.”

An Open Letter to Confused Catholics, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-14.htm

Anonymous said...

"Vatican II is the French Revolution in the Church."

So gloated Cardinal Suenens. The big unanswered question, one that Joseph de Maistre could never have conceived of, is how will we cope with the Revolution having entered the Church?

Mr. Ortiz said...

"Some three hundred pages after attacking the Catholic Church for honoring the saints and angels, the author turns, at last, to the great question of Indulgences. Here again, one has the momentary illusion of reading some Reformation Tract, rather than the work of an up-to-date atheist."

from "God is No Delusion: A refutation of Richard Dawkins"

by Thomas Crean, O.P.

A solid read, here and there supporting this post.

All the guns are aimed at Rome.

shane said...

Watch closely the financial situation in Europe. I suspect another revolution awaits us.

Anonymous said...

How does one reconcile with prelates who openly stated that Vatican II was the 1789 revolution in the Church.? I understand more and more everyday why those "stubborn" traditionalists have resisted so much.

Barbara


You have hit the nail on the head, Barbara, and the answer IMO is simply that we do not reconcile with them until and unless they profess what Holy Mother Church has always held, taught and professed to be true from apostolic times. No more counter-syllabus talk and nonsense such as that - what the perennial magisterium has always held to be true is our guide and our benchmark. This does not mean, of course, that we don't communicate with them or that we don't recognize their august position in the Church but that we maintain our position in the face of all the onslaughts against us.

LtCol Paul E. Haley, USAF(Ret)

M. A. said...

"The greatest mark of respect and of profound esteem that can be shown them [the French noble classes], is to remind them that the French revolution—which they would, no doubt, have redeemed with the last drop of their blood—was, nevertheless, in a great measure their own work."
--------------

When reading the above passage, I couldn't help but recall something an elderly priest told me not too long ago. Juxtapose the above text with a change of reference and the result is essentially what Father told me: "We did it to ourselves!"

It would read this way: "The greatest mark of respect and of profound esteem that can be shown them [our Catholic hierarchy],is to remind them that the 'French revolution' — which they would, no doubt, have redeemed with the last drop of their blood—was, nevertheless, in a great measure their own work."

davidforster said...

Replace "French Revolution" by "Vatican 2," and "French nobility" by "Catholic Bishops." Isn't the whole extract still true?

Blayne Riley said...

Of course anything negative from the Second Vatican Council(and even more disastrous subsequent 'reforms') would be the fault of a decadent culture the Church had built within itself. The culture of the Vatican had been entirely toxic decades prior(look at what they did to St. Pio). It's really frightening, because the way politics are done haven't changed at all. These days of somehow expecting the hierarchy to swing back and somehow 'know what will be best', will not come effectively simply by biding our time and waiting for so many of these bishops to die. We need some genuine reform and transparency from these bishops, and yes the Vatican. We need it without undermining the Apostolic office of these men. How Our Lord could use priests, religious, and laity to help achieve that, I don't know. But something needs to change in the culture and make it... I dunno... more Christian. Best we can do right now is work to live better lives. Being of Irish stock, and I look at the horrors being revealed in Cloyne, I do wonder that if the bishops had more transparency and accountability that some of this could have been averted. I just don't know.

As for the French Revolution... Let's pray for a truly Christian restoration of the House of Bourbon(or the House God sees fit to rule), and a makeup that is truly Christian in nature with the aristocracy, whatever form it takes.

Anonymous said...

If it is desirable to offer a diagnosis of the [document G/S] as a whole, we might say that (in conjunction with the [documents] on religious liberty and world religions) it is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of countersyllabus…. The document serves as a counter syllabus and, as such, represents, on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789.” (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology [Ignatius Press, 1987], pp. 381-382.)

Vatican II was altogether a conciliation of the Catholic religion, of the Church’s faith with liberalism, with the revolution and the principles of the French Revolution, and even—as the pope says elsewhere—a reconciliation of the idea of faith with Enlightenment thinking. These statements call for several reflections and comments.

Excerpted from Bishop de Galarreta's June 29th Ordination Sermon

Malta said...

Vatican II was worse than the French Revolution. Where the latter wrecked and ruined the Church and Cathedrals in one country, the former wrecked and ruined the Church and Cathedrals throughout the world.

Anonymous said...

Barbara!!! Not you too??????

Delphina

Tradster said...

David Forster,

Somehow, I hope you're wrong. But I cannot rule out that you may well be right.

Jack said...

\\Were Protestants ever known to amuse themselves writing books against the Greek, Nestorian, or Syriac churches, which profess dogmas that Protestantism abhors? They do no such thing.\\

This statement is not true. I've seen plenty of Protestant books trashing Orthodoxy and the non-Chalcedonian Churches.

Even when the Lutheran professors in Germany sent a Greek translation of the Augustana to the then Patriarch of Constantinople in the 16th century, they said, "If the Greeks have care to their everlasting salvation, they must embrace our doctrine, or else perish eternally."

There are even websites (which I won't mention here) that condemn Orthodox and Eastern Church doctrines.

Knight of Malta said...

“One cannot understand the French or the Russian revolutions unless one knows something of the old regimes which they brought to an end… It is the same in church affairs: a reaction can only be judged in relation to the state of things that preceded it...The Second Vatican Council marked the end of an epoch; and if we stand back from it a little more we see it marked the end of a series of epochs, the end of an age”.--Cardinal Suenens

"If we look carefully, it is by means of its slogan that the Revolution has penetrated the Church. 'Liberty'--this is the religious liberty we spoke of earlier, which confers rights on error. 'Equality--collegiality and the destruction of personal authority, the authority of God, of the pope, of the bishops; in a word, majority rule. Finally, 'Fraternity' is represented by ecumenism...The Modernists have gotten what they wanted."

M. A. said...

"We need some genuine reform and transparency from these bishops, and yes the Vatican. We need it without undermining the Apostolic office of these men."
---------------------------

Stop funding anything N.O., including the diocesan collections. Don't give them a penny!

Stay united to our Lady in spirit through meditating on the mysteries of the rosary.

Keep informed,but follow the advise of St. Pio - don't worry.

Woody said...

Also apropos of this discussion, in which I fully share the views of Comte de Maistre and others here, note this from Gerald Warber, writing in the main a very favorable obit for HIRH Otto von Habsburg:http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Gerald-Warner-34The-EU-is.6798863.jp

The money quote is that the EU is not the heir of Austria-Hungary (as Otto had thought/wished), but of the French Revolution.

Steve said...

"Christianity is wholly based upon the Sovereign Pontiff"

The only solution is the consecration of Russia, not the world, but R-U-S-S-I-A by name, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Pope with all the Bishops.

If you thought a lot of Bishops balked at the idea of Summorum Pontificum, just wait till they get an order to join in the consecration of Russia!

Blayne Riley said...

I think the Novus Ordo is a big issue, but a symptom, not the cause. Honestly the really bad post-V2 stuff went off without a hitch. The types of abuses by religious orders in Ireland goes back as early as the thirties. There's something deeper here, and lumping it on the Novus Ordo is a mistake. I know way too many good practicing Catholics who aren't related at all with the SSPX, I myself aspire to be one of them.

Knight of Malta said...

If you include the Napoleonic wars (a result of the Revolution) the death toll of the Revolution was over 1,000,000. The guillotine beheaded thousands, including many priests, whose blood literally ran in rivers. Ann Coulter gives an excellent two chapter treatment in her new book Demonic. One can't imagine the level of hatred leveled against the Church during the Revolution.

Nor, can one imagine the level of hatred hurled at the Traditional Church by the likes of the Vatican II Revolutionary periti (or, 'top advisors' on the the schemas--drafts of the texts--which the bishops voted on), such as Hans Kung:

"Archbishop Paul Bernier (Bishop of Gaspé, Quebec), in his book, Eucharist Celebrating Its Rhythms in Our Lives (p. 89) made the following statement regarding the Vatican II periti: 'In the decade before that council, people like John Courtney Murray, Henri De Lubac, Yves Congar, Pierre Chenu, Teilhard de Chardin, even Karl Rahner were silenced by Rome. All of them emerged as either periti (advisors) or as lights by which the council guided itself.'" [Vatican II-The Formation of a New church]

LeonG said...

Significantly when Cardinals such as Suenens describe the VCII as the french revolution of the Catholic church we can understand that the freemasons have both feet in the Vatican door and are creating havoc.

Anonymous said...

A bas la République!

Vive le Roi!

Anonymous said...

Ann Coulter...the feminist librarians give me dirty looks when I inquire about the availability of her books. One time I asked a librarian if she ever read anything by her. Not trusting her voice to betray what she was really thinking, she simple plastered a smile on and shook her head "no". Ha! ha! ha!

Delphina

Knight of Malta said...

Btw, and as an aside, when I was a student at the University of Michigan (this being mid 90's) I was actually very fond of Kung, having read the psycho-babble, Karl Barth-obsessed, "On Being a Christian". So, I was excited when he came to the UM for a lecture.

My jaw dropped to the floor when I heard him advocating for abortion (even at that time, though no Traditionalist, I was very against it). Here was this priest, in a suit, advocating the killing of unborn children! And then the audience exploded in the sort-of pell-melt, happy-clappy, uproarious applause that only a room full of idiot liberals are capable. And from that day, to today, I think Hans Kung is Satan's bait for liberal "catholics". What a pile of work that boob is!

Anonymous said...

Got to love Joseph de Maistre.

Anonymous said...

By the way, I recommend listening to these sermons on the French Revolution:

Part 1:

http://www.audiosancto.org/sermon/20071125-The-French-Revolution-as-a-Type-of-the-End-Times-Part-1-of-2.html

Part 2:

http://www.audiosancto.org/sermon/20071202-The-French-Revolution-as-a-Type-of-the-End-Times-Part-2-of-2.html

Joe B said...

Blayne, I have a little different view than you do - what made Vatican II the problem and not just the symptom was the unique degree of power it transferred to revolutionaries and their use of that power to subdue our main weapon against Satan - our mass. That had never happened before.

There have always been revolutionaries within the church, and sometimes many of them, but they never breached the mass. Take that back and we win.

Jonvilas said...

The problem with EU is that it was begun by true catholics Schumann and Adenauer. However, rather soon, i.e. after their death, it became a masonic project. The same, as French Revolution. However, we should remember the promise of Jesus Christ: super hanc petram edificabo ecclesiam meam et porta inferi non praevalebunt. I know, that sometimes one nearly shouts: how long, o Lord... In Christo

Anonymous said...

To equate the Second Vatican Council with the French Revolution either shows ignorance of the utter, physical savagery of the Revolution or a contempt for the many martyrs for the Faith it produced. Have a lot of bad things been done in the name of the council? Undoubtedly. But how much blood has been spilled because of it? Where are the ecclesiastical guillotines? I don't mean symbolic ones, I mean real ones. It makes for bombastic rhetoric but not for reality to equate the council with the Reign of Terror. This kind of talk either shows a callousness to their sufferings or an overindulgence of self pity.

Anonymous said...

"I know way too many good practicing Catholics who aren't related at all with the SSPX"

I thought that we were not allowed to say that here on Rorate Caeli? How did that slip through the moderators?

Oh well, for what it is worth, I know many good librarians who aren't related at all with feminism. WorldCat shows thousands of libraries in North America that hold Ann Coulter's books.

Jack said...

Delphina, I have read a couple of Ann Coulter's books.

I find a definite strident tone in them. She complained about water conserving toilets in one of them, and asked why we should try to conserve something "that literally falls from the sky" (her phrase).

I live in a large city in the southwest, and trust me, not much water falls from the sky here.

Anonymous said...

I think the precedent for the French Revolution was, of course, not the American Revolution, but the English Civil Wars, the precedent for which were the French Wars of Religion of the 16th century--fomented, at least as early as the 1530s, by Protestants. The crude and disgusting attack on the Mass, in the Affaire des Placards, was Zwinglerian in thrust, not Lutheran The Protestant attempt to kidnap the King, in 1560, leads to Protestant exile: why would it not? From that especially, it is easy enough to draw a straight line to Cromwell, complicated and many as the reasons for Civil Wars were. Was Protestantism essentially diabolical? Some of it clearly was, but its violent nature strikes me as the earliest parallel in early modern times for the French Revolution.

Jordanes551 said...

A smart alleck said: "I know way too many good practicing Catholics who aren't related at all with the SSPX"
I thought that we were not allowed to say that here on Rorate Caeli? How did that slip through the moderators?


It might have something to do with the fact that at least one of the moderators is a practicing Catholic (I would not say good) who isn't related at all with the SSPX.

Anonymous said...

Haughty French Catholics and French kings betrayed Christianity for so long and in so many ways that God punished them by choosing their country to be the very first to suffer the Revolution they helped to spread and grow to protect their profane interests, and by associating the name of their nation with the biggest Satanic political victory in history.

I guess their protestant and muslim allies didn´t help to much in 1789, did they? They were more useful when fighting against Catholic armies.

Henri I, duc de Guise, ora pronobis.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 14 July, 2011 22:52, the destruction of Vatican II isn't physical, but spiritual. Tens of millions upon tens of millions upon tens of millions of souls will rain into hell like snowflakes because of Vatican II. Thus Vatican II was not only as bad as the FR, but far, far worse.

New Catholic said...

"I know way too many good practicing Catholics who aren't related at all with the SSPX"

I thought that we were not allowed to say that here on Rorate Caeli? How did that slip through the moderators?
---
This was a mischievous comment, but I allowed it through anyway because we like debate. At leat we do like it sometimes, when it is appropriate (this is certainly an example of a debate-provoking post).

Anyway, there are good practicing Catholics almost anywhere, God knows their names. I hope to be among them when my time is up.

Anonymous said...

Lt.Col Paul Haley,

Thank you for responding to my rather naughty question. You are undoubtedly right. I would like to think that I would have the strength of faith and spirit to adhere to “what Holy Mother Church has always held, taught and professed to be true since Apostolic times” if I am ever faced with real persecution. As apostasy creeps all over Europe, especially the North, Christians (especially Catholics) even now suffer a type of persecution at an ideological level. Of course there are multiple causes for our present predicament, but scholars indicate that it began with the Reformation and the two Creeps Luther and Henry, then the so called Enlightment (the “Endarkment” when you banish God from reality) and the diabolical parent of all totalitarian states, the French Revolution, lead us down the slippery slope of godlessness that we are now on.

To the poster who thinks some of us are nuts to compare Vatican II with the French Revolution, some of the protagonists of that dramatic event in the Church declared it openly (as some posters have already mentioned here ). ….obviously they meant from an ideological point of view i.e. so the following post from Anon. of 15 July 0:23 could well be true:

“Anon at 14 July, 2011 22:52, the destruction of Vatican II isn't physical, but spiritual. Tens of millions upon tens of millions upon tens of millions of souls will rain into hell like snowflakes because of Vatican II. Thus Vatican II was not only as bad as the FR, but far, far worse.”
It’s a tremendous thought.

Dear Delphina,

Sorry, but what do you mean?

Grace from Our Lady who can ever be our help in need.

Barbara

Malta said...

Anon @ 22:52: But how much blood has been spilled because of it [Vatican II]? Where are the ecclesiastical guillotines? I don't mean symbolic ones, I mean real ones...

True, little real blood has been spilled due to VII. But countless souls have been lost to eternal perdition because of it. Which is worse? The loss of blood, or the loss of souls?

Pascal said...

"...at least one of the moderators is a practicing Catholic (I would not say good) who isn't related at all with the SSPX."

Hey! Make that at least two! :)