| From January 2004 Catholic
Family News |
|
More News on the Interfaith Program at
Fatima |
by John Vennari
Catholic Family
News reported last month on the interreligious Congress at Fatima: "The
Present of Man, the Future of God, the Place of Sanctuary in Relation to the
Sacred". I attended this Congress in Portugal which was held from October
10-12, 2003.1
Speakers at the
Congress, including Father Jacques Dupuis and Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald,
told delegates that Catholics should not seek to convert non-Catholics
to the Catholic Church. This is because, according to the new, ecumenical
system, non-Catholics are already part of the "Reign of God," and do not
have to convert to the Catholic Church for salvation.
On the subject of "no
salvation outside the Catholic Church," which is a defined dogma that Catholics
must believe in order to remain Catholic, Father Dupuis said in disgust, "There
is no need to invoke here that horrible text from the Council of Florence."
Father Dupuis also said that the purpose of dialogue is to help "the Christian
to become a better Christian, and the Hindu a better Hindu."
The Cardinal
Patriarch of Lisbon, Fatima Shrine Rector, Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, and
Apostolic Delegate all applauded Dupuis speech wherein, among many other
outrages, he denounced a defined doctrine of the Church.
The next day, the
Vaticans Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald told the audience, "Father Dupuis
yesterday explained the theological basis of the establishment of relations
with people of other religions." In short, Archbishop Fitzgerald praised Father
Dupuis heresies.
The Sunday session at
the Congress included testimonies from representatives of Buddhism, Hinduism,
Islam, Anglicanism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism. At this session, Father
Arul Irudayam, Rector of the Catholic Marian Shrine at Vailankanni, India,
boasted that, as a further development of ecumenical comradery, Hindus now
perform their heathen rites inside the Catholic Church. The conference
delegates, including Archbishop Fitzgerald, were delighted that this Marian
Shrine was now used for idolatrous rituals. How long before the Shrine at
Fatima is desecrated in a similar manner?
The November 1
Portugal News published that this Congress was part of a plan to turn
Fatima into an Interfaith Shrine. The Notícias de Fátima,
a bi-weekly newspaper of Fatima, also reported on the event. It splashed the
headline in bold red type across the front page of its October 24 edition:
"Sanctuary of Various Creeds". Page 8 of the same Notícias de
Fátima ran the story, "Sanctuary Opens Itself to Religious
Pluralism," followed by the sub-heading, "The Shrine of Fatima assumes a
universalist and welcoming vocation towards different religions."
Both Portugal
News and Notícias de Fátima featured the statement,
"The future of Fatima must pass through the creation of a shrine where
different religions can mingle." Notícias de Fátima
printed these words as a front page photo caption, and the Portugal News
attributed these words to the Fatima Shrine Rector, Monsignor Guerra.
The Fatima Shrines Journal
A little more news
has arrived from Portugal on Fatimas new pan-religious venture, this time
from the Fatima Shrines own journal, Voz de Fatima. The November
17 issue of this newspaper ran two short pieces about the Congress, both of
which give the appearance that the pan-religious program at Fatima is the way
of the future. The alleged plan to turn Fatima into an "Interfaith Shrine"
received no mention; neither confirmation nor denial. Yet tragically, the
journal spoke in glowing terms about the Interreligious Congress, and about
Fatimas new ecumenical orientation.
The first article
entitled "Specialists Point Towards Sanctuaries as Examples of Growth in
Faith," summarized the closing remarks of the Fatima Congress. Voz de
Fatima said, "The example of the presence of representatives of several
religions at this meeting was highlighted ... by the organizers, considering
that interreligious dialogue is not a favor or a yielding up of
something, but rather a necessity of faith
itself."2
This is extremely
grave. Here the Fatima Shrines official newspaper tells its readers that
the novel concept of pan-religious dialogue, which by the Congress own
definition means that we do not try to convert non-Catholics to the Catholic
Church, is a "necessity of faith itself".
How could it be a
necessity of "faith itself" that Catholics no longer attempt to convert to the
true Faith those who are in the darkness of false religions?
Voz de Fatima
then writes, "Msgr. Luciano Guerra, Rector of the Fatima Shrine, expressed the
same opinion comparing dialogue to bridges, in this case between different
religions. We intend to analyze the foundations of the bridges to find
out if we can count on them in the future, he affirmed. In his opinion,
Fatima plays an essential role in the strengthening of
ecumenical and interreligious dialogue."
This statement is
similar to what Notícias de Fátima attributed to Msgr.
Guerra, where he said, "Its the first step. We are like the engineers in
Portugal who begin by examining the structures of the bridges to see if we can
trust them in the future."
We may assume that
despite Msgr. Guerras alleged "caution" about "testing the structures,"
the Fatima Shrine, according to the Shrines official journal, is now
embarked on the ecumenical program.
The second article in
Voz de Fatima quotes the Vaticans Archbishop Michael J.
Fitzgerald, Prefect of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.
Fitzgerald was also a speaker at the Congress, and praised Father Dupuis
heretical speech wherein Dupuis denounced the Council of Florence.
The article entitled,
"Dialogue Between Religions Progressed Much with John Paul II," opens: "The
President of the Council for Interreligious Dialogue, during the proceedings of
the International Congress at Fatima, praised the actions of John Paul II in
opening up to other religions, pointing out that Catholicism has changed its
manner of viewing them."
"The missions still
remain and we announce Jesus Christ but the manner in which we do so is
different," now that the Church is beginning to "recognize signs of the
sacred in other religions, points of discussion that, before John Paul II and
Vatican II, were not raised."
Archbishop Fitzgerald
goes on to applaud Pope John Paul IIs novel, ecumenical initiatives. He
says that in a "common search" for the sacred, the religions should "reconcile
forces to confront the secularization of a world becoming ever more godless."
He also admitted that there are those in the Church who do not accept this new
interreligious effort.
"There are people
who cling very tightly to their way of comprehending tradition," said
Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald. "There are people who are critical of these
steps, but our response has to be dialogue with all, even those who oppose
us."
I agree with
Archbishop Fitzgerald that "there are people who cling very tightly to their
way of comprehending tradition." But those who do this are not traditional
Catholics, but the ecumenists themselves. It is the post-Conciliar ecumenists
who have distorted tradition from its true meaning in order to make way for a
"living tradition" which includes novelties such as pan-religious activities.
They ignore Pope Saint Pius X who warned, "far, far from the clergy be the love
of novelty".
Pope Saint Pius X
wrote in his Encyclical Against Modernism on the duty to maintain
tradition:
"But for Catholics nothing will remove the authority of the
second Council of Nice, where it condemns those who dare, after the
impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical
traditions, to invent novelties of some kind ... or endeavor by malice
or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the
Catholic Church.
Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV and Pius
IX, ordered the insertion in the profession of faith of the following
declaration: I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and
ecclesiastical traditions and other observances and constitutions of
the Church."3
And the Second
Council of Nice teaches infallibly,
"If anyone rejects any written or
unwritten tradition of the Church, let him be
anathema."4
Ecumenism "derides
ecclesiastical tradition" as well as defined Catholic doctrine. It takes pride
in pan-religious activities which have been condemned throughout the
entire history of the Church.5 In the name of ecumenism,
todays Church leaders have "invented novelties," such as the
pan-religious "Spirit of Assisi" which places the one true Church of Jesus
Christ on the same level with false creeds. These leaders also "reject written
and unwritten traditions of the Church" as they attempt to "change"
Catholicisms "way of viewing" non-Catholics.
A clear example of
this was mentioned earlier. Father Jacques Dupuis at this Fatima Congress,
openly called a defined dogma of the Council of Florence a "horrible text" that
must be rejected in order to make way for the new ecumenical religion.
Archbishop Fitzgerald not only praised Dupuis speech, but later scorned
those Catholics who rightly adhere to Tradition as defined by Pope Saint Pius X
and by the Second Council of Nice. Thus we see that it is the ecumenists
themselves who "cling very tightly" to their modernist "way of
comprehending tradition".
"Dialogue" with the Cardinal
Before we discuss how
the post-Conciliar Church has "changed its manner of viewing" non-Catholics, we
must first address Arch-bishop Fitzgeralds statement that ecumenical
Church leaders are open to dialogue with those Catholics who challenge the new
ecumenical policy.
We have, in fact, a
sampling of such "dialogue".
An exchange took
place at the Congress between a group of young people from the Society of Saint
Pius X and the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon, Jose de Cruz Policarpo. The young
people were there because Father Danjou, Prior of the Society of Saint Pius X
in Portugal, organized the distribution of 35,000 pamphlets in Fatima
denouncing the ecumenical event.6 He also organized two ceremonies
of reparation. The young people from the M.J.C.F. (Catholic Youth Group in
France), came especially from south east France to help distribute the
flyers.
Some of these young
people attended the Congress. The following interview, published by
DICI,7 took place between members of the M.J.C.F. and
Cardinal Policarpo after his speech on Saturday afternoon.
M.J.C.F.:
Your Eminence, I would like to have some precision. In your speech you said
that "each religion when practiced with sincerity was leading to God". Yet
Sister Lucy of Fatima in Os Apelos, commenting upon the First
Commandment, says that "there is only one God who deserves our adoration, the
other divinities are nothing, are worth nothing and can do nothing for us". How
are we to reconcile those two visions of God?
Card. P.:
But, my boy, such a vision is outmoded. What are those divinities Sister Lucy
is talking about? We Christians, Muslims, Jews, we all have the same God.
M.J.C.F.:
(Silent, aghast, wide-eyed.)
Card. P.: Of
course, the faith must be Christocentric, but the other religions are in
progress towards Christ, each is more or less advanced, thats all!
M.J.C.F.: Yet
we do not have the same religion as the Muslims or the Jews. Then, how can one
say we have the same God?
Card. P.: You
know, I did a lot of studying when I was young. If youre a Christian, as
you say you are, its a question of culture, thats because you were
taught so. For the Muslim, its just the same.
M.J.C.F.:
But, Your Eminence, how far will ecumenism go?
Card. P.: Each
religion has something to teach you. Experience of other religions is very
important, weve got a lot to learn from them.
M.J.C.F.: But
yet it is written in the Koran: "Do not take the Christians or the Jews for
your friends."
Card. P.:
Youve read the Koran, my boy?
M.J.C.F.:
Yes, twice!
Card. P.: In
Arabic?
M.J.C.F.: No,
but our religion is based on Revelation. Could the so-called prophet Mohammed
truly have received a part of Revelation?
Card. P.: You
must have read a bad translation. Islam has a lot to teach you.
M.J.C.F.: In
the Apocalypse, the apostle St. John warns us to beware of false prophets. Is
Mohammed a false prophet?
Card. P.: (he
was getting nervous) Young man, I leave you the full responsibility of the
answer!
The Cardinal brushed them aside to go, but one of the young
people held him back slightly.
M.J.C.F.: Your Eminence, you did not answer my question,
I believe?
Card. P.: It may be said that in the time of Jeremias,
Mohammed would have been considered a false prophet.
The Cardinal then
went away, pushing the young people aside and without saying goodbye.
Notice, we are
supposed to be in the age of smiling post-Conciliar prelates who "love the
youth". Yet these young people at Fatima were not the vapid, defrauded
rocknrollers who show up at World Youth Day, but Catholics who knew
their religion and who respectfully challenged the Cardinal that todays
ecumenism conflicts with perennial Catholic teaching and practice. There were
no smiles from the Cardinal for this group of youth, but only contempt,
derision, and the refusal to answer directly the questions they put to him.
The next day, the
entrance was guarded by three people, and the young people of M.J.C.F. had to
give two proofs of identity each, in order to be allowed inside.
A priest then called
after them at the door: "You may not enter!"
M.J.C.F.: But
we have an authorization.
The priest:
OK, but then not a single question!
The priest then
stayed behind them during the whole conference to assure that these young
people did not ask any awkward questions.
Now, these young
people only tried to engage the Cardinal in dialogue. They only hoped,
the next day, to engage other members of the Congress in dialogue. But
because they asked hard questions, based on perennial Catholic truth, they were
pushed aside, silenced and policed.
It is clear from this
exchange that the new ecumenical religion cannot handle an honest critic. It is
a house of cards that collapses when it confronts the Catholic Faith of all
time. So when Archbishop Fitzgerald says that he is willing to "dialogue" with
those who oppose the new ecumenical spirit, the above interchange between the
M.J.C.F. and Cardinal Policarpo gives us an idea of how this "dialogue" will
proceed.
Evangelization and Mission Redefined
Archbishop
Fitzgerald claims that Catholicism has "changed its manner of viewing"
non-Catholic religions. He also claims that the Church still "announces Jesus
Christ, but the manner in which we do so is different."
How is it different?
And how has the "Church" changed its "manner of viewing" non-Catholics?
The answer is found
in the new policy of "Dialogue and Proclamation" which is now said to be part
of the Churchs program of "Mission and Evangelization". "Evangelization"
and "Mission" no longer strictly mean that we work to convert non-Catholics to
the one true Church. As with many other elements in the post-Conciliar Church,
our progressivist leaders have redefined the terms.
The true meaning of
Evangelization and Mission comes from the mandate that Our Lord gave to His
apostles. "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in
the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." (Matt.
28:19) "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not
believe shall be condemned." (Mark 15:16) Holy Missionaries since the
founding of Christianity went to their deaths for the conversion of
non-Catholics.
But today? No! We
dont do that any more. We just read Cardinal Policarpo who called this
"an outmoded vision," and said that we all worship the same "God". So we dare
not try to convert non-Catholics. Rather we engage in pan-religious dialogue
with members of false religions; a dialogue that tells non-Catholics that it is
perfectly acceptable to God for them to remain within their man-made
creeds.
This is the new
notion of "Evangelization" and "Mission". It is part of the new ecumenical
policy of "Dialogue and Proclamation," which is the name of a 1991 Vatican
document on Interreligious Dialogue. Here is how the new system works. We
proclaim the Catholic Faith to non-Catholics, because we
believe Catholicism to be the best religion, as it has the "fullness of the
truth". And we hope that those to whom we proclaim it to
will also think it is the best, and choose to become Catholic also.
But if they do not
become Catholic, then thats fine too. They are perfectly acceptable to
God in their false religion, since as Father Dupuis said in his speech
Catholics and non-Catholics are "co-members in the Reign of God". So, we
simply dialogue with them, and work together in peaceful
co-existence. Or to use Archbishop Fitzgeralds words, we work with one
another "to confront the secularization of the world" and "to bring about a
greater peace and harmony among people of other religions."
This is the new
construct of "Dialogue and Proclamation" that constitutes the post-Conciliar
Churchs notion of "Evangelization" and "Mission". It is why Father
Jacques Dupuis in his speech defined pan-religious practice and interreligious
dialogue as part of the Churchs "Mission of Evangelization," and he
quoted a 1984 document from the Council of Interreligious Dialogue to bolster
his claim.
Likewise, the 1991
Vatican document "Dialogue and Proclamation" places "proclaiming Christ" on an
equal footing with "dialogue" with false religions. The document says, "Just as
interreligious dialogue is one element in the mission of the Church, the
proclamation of Gods saving work in Our Lord is another ... There can
be no question of choosing one and ignoring or rejecting the
other."8 According to this 1991 Vatican document, we must not
only proclaim Christ, but we must also "dialogue" with non-Catholics who
have no intention to convert to the one true Church, and recognize their false
religion as a valid way to God.
Do not be fooled,
then, when Church leaders in the highest places use Catholic words such as
"Mission" and "Evangelization" that they have invested with non-Catholic
meaning.
Contempt of Dogma
The new program of
"Dialogue and Proclamation" is a head-on collision with Church teaching
throughout the centuries.
The Council of
Florence defined infallibly that "Pagans, Jews, heretics and schismatics" are
"outside the Catholic Church," and as such, "can never be partakers of eternal
life," unless "before death" they are joined to the one true Church of Jesus
Christ, the Catholic Church.9
The Catechism of
the Council of Trent, faithful to this truth, teaches, "infidels, heretics,
schismatics and excommunicated persons" are "excluded from the Churchs
pale".10 In other words, Protestants, Jews, Muhammadans, Hindus,
Buddhists, etc., are not part of the Catholic Church, which is the Kingdom of
God on earth.11
The Catechism of
Pope Saint Pius X, centuries later, presents the same truth without change.
It teaches, "Outside the true Church are: Infidels, Jews, heretics, apostates,
schismatics and excommunicated persons". It states further, "No one can be
saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman Church, just as no one could
be saved from the flood outside the Ark of Noah, which was a figure of the
Church."12
Pope Pius XI embodied
this doctrine in his Consecration of the Human Race to the Sacred Heart of
Jesus. This prayer, which was part of the Churchs official liturgy until
Vatican II, reads: "Be Thou King of all those who are deceived by false
opinions and whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of
truth and the unity of faith, so that soon there may be but one flock and one
Shepherd. Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of
idolatry or of Islamism, and refuse not to draw them all into the light and
kingdom of God."13
This prayer, faithful
to perennial Catholic doctrine, reveals that members of heretical and
schismatic groups, such as Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy, are not members
of the Church. And that those who are still involved in the darkness of
idolatry, such as Hindus and Buddhists, as well as Moslems, are not part of the
Kingdom of God.
Countless other
examples can be given, but the above quotations suffice to demonstrate the
Churchs consistent doctrine throughout the ages about members of false
religions. Yet it is this teaching which is unlawfully rejected, jettisoned,
scorned, overturned by todays "Civilization of Love" Catholics who
construct a new ecumenical theology which abandons traditional teaching for the
sake of their modernist dream.
The New Religion
In 1963, the eminent
theologian Msgr. David Greenstock warned that during Vatican II, there were
certain theologians who were trying to invent a new ecumenical theology to fit
alleged "modern needs". He warned that there can be no "new theology" of unity
which in any way rejects the truth that non-Catholics must convert to the
Catholic Church for unity and salvation. He wrote, "there should be no attempt
to create a new ecumenical theology to fit the ecumenical
situation."14
Yet this is precisely
what happened at Vatican II and in its aftermath. Archbishop Fitzgeralds
"new manner" of viewing non-Catholics is precisely the "new ecumenical
theology" that Msgr. Greenstock warned against as a betrayal of the Council of
Trent and of Vatican Council I.
In fact, Vatican I
taught infallibly that even a Pope cannot change defined dogma, (such as "no
salvation outside the Catholic Church").
On this point,
Vatican I taught, "The Holy Spirit was not promised to the successor of
Peter that by the revelation of the Holy Spirit they might disclose new
doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation
transmitted through the Apostles and the deposit of Faith, and might faithfully
set it forth."15
The distinguished
theologian Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton employed this text to explain:
"Catholic dogma is immutable ... the same identical truths are always presented
to the people as having been revealed by God. Their meaning never
changes."16
Thus, even a Pope
cannot change doctrine, teach new doctrine, or interpret Catholic doctrine in a
manner different from how it has been taught for 2000 years.
Added to this is the
Oath Against Modernism that these men the Fatima Shrine Rector Msgr.
Guerra, Cardinal Policarpo, Father Jacques Dupuis, and even young deacons in
the 1940s and 50s named Ratzinger, Kasper and Wojtyla swore to God
before their ordination. Part of that Oath reads:
"I sincerely hold that the doctrine of Faith was handed down
to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same
meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the
heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to
another, different from the one which the Church held
previously."
At the end of the
Oath, they swear before God:
"I promise that I shall keep all these articles
faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way
deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing.
Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God, and these holy Gospels of God
which I touch with my hand."17
Again, Msgr. Fenton
remarked in 1960 that any priest who promoted Modernism after taking the Oath
Against Modernism would mark himself as a "sinner against the Catholic Faith
and as a common perjurer".18
Tragically, the men
at this pan-religious Congress at Fatima, as well as clergymen and prelates
even to the highest office in Rome, who swore the Oath Against Modernism, and
who now promote the new ecumenical religion, which says that the Catholic
truths of yesterday must be rejected or reworked to make way for the new
ecumenical religion of today, have violated their Oath. They are, in the words
of Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, "sinners against the Catholic Faith and common
perjurers".
They took a solemn
Oath before God that they would not change the Catholic religion, and they
changed it.
We must pray for
these men, but we must not follow their bad example. Nor must we stand idle
while they subvert the Shrine at Fatima, a place sanctified by Our Ladys
visitations, into their new interfaith religion. Thanks to these men and their
ecumenical delusions, the pan-religious "Spirit of Assisi," which desecrates
everything Catholic that it touches, is now let loose in Fatima.
It is time to say
"enough"! In the face of the outrage now underway at Fatima, we may not remain
complacent. If we do not protest, if we do not resist, if we do not mount a
forceful opposition to this blasphemy against Our Blessed Mother, then we are
not fit to be called Our Ladys children.
Notes:
1. "Fatima to Become an Interfaith Shrine? An
Account from One Who Was There," J. Vennari, Catholic Family News,
December, 2003. Also on the web at http://www.fatima.org/news/newsviews/sprep111303.asp
2. Both articles from Voz de Fatima were
translated into English by Joseph Cain.
3. Pascendi, emphasis added.
4. Cited from The Great Facade, p. 28.
Emphasis added.
5. In 398 AD, the Council of Carthage taught:
"None must either pray or sing psalms with heretics; and whomsoever shall
communicate with those who are cut off from the Communion of the Church,
whether clergymen or laic, let him be excommunicated." Coun. Carth. iv. 72 and
73. Cited from The Sincere Christian, by Bishop George Hay, (James Duffy
& Sons, Dublin - Imprimatur by G.J. Walsh, Archbishop of Dublin) p.
555.
6. At the same time, volunteers from Father
Gruners Fatima Crusader were also at Fatima to distribute
Chronology of a Cover-up booklets.
7. Documentation Information Catholiques
Internationales, November 29, 2003. (www.dici.org).
8. "Dialogue and Proclamation," No. 6. Taken from
the Vatican web page.
9. Bull Cantate Domino issued by Pope
Eugene IV at the Council of Florence, February 4, 1442.
10. Catechism of the Council of Trent,
McHugh & Callan Translation, (Rockford: Tan, Reprinted 1982), p.
101.
11. Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton explains that
the word "Church" has a very definite meaning. It means, the Kingdom of God on
earth, the People of the Divine Covenant, the one social unit outside of which
no one can be saved. See "The Meaning of the Word Church," Msgr.
Fenton, American Ecclesiastical Review, October, 1954,
republished in the November 2000 Catholic Family News.
(Reprint #519 available from CFN for $1.75.)
12. The Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X,
(First published in 1910, republished by Instauratio Press, Australia),
pages 31 and 41.
13. Of the Jews, this Consecration says, "Turn
Thine eyes of mercy towards the children of that race, once Thy chosen people.
Of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior. May it now
descend upon them a lavor of redemption and of life."
14. "Unity: Special Problems, Dogmatic and
Moral," Father David Greenstock, The Thomist, 1963. See the recent
commentary on this article, "Vatican II vs. the Unity Willed by Christ," J.
Vennari, Catholic Family News, December, 2000. (Reprint #537
available from CFN for $1.75 post-paid).
15. Vatican I, Session III, Chap. IV, Dei
Filius.
16. We Stand With Christ, Joseph Clifford
Fenton, (Bruce, 1942), p. 2.
17. Oath Against Modernism, issued by Pope Saint
Pius X, September 1, 1910.
18. "The Sacrorum Antistitum and the
Background of the Oath Against Modernism," Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, The
American Ecclesiastical Review, October, 1960, pp. 259-260.
Return to Table of Contents
|