A Catechism of Errors

Mons. Carlo Maria Viganò

Preface

to “A Catechism of Errors -
A Critique of the principal errors of the Catechism of the Catholic Church”
by Michael Haynes

Many Catholics still remember, perhaps with nostalgia, the simplicity of the formulae both of the Catechism of Saint Pius X as well as the great Catechism of the Council of Trent, the Major Catechism for adults. In the United State, the spread of the faith is linked to the famous Baltimore Catechism, published in 1885. At times, some of these responses which have been impressed into our minds come forth from our memory, showing how effective they were. Essentially nothing of that adamantine simplicity remained in the new catechesis generated by Vatican II. The wordiness of the new Catechism of the Catholic Church is in perfect coherence with the equivocal style that the Council inaugurated in its “magisterium” and its liturgy. It could not have been otherwise: just as the errors insinuated in the conciliar documents had to be expressed in a muddled and verbose language, so the official expression of its doctrine had to take place in a no-less-imprecise manner, so as to permit the transmission of the new doctrine proposed by the new church of the council.

The opening petitions of the Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum with which John Paul II promulgated the new Catechism do not erase its criticisms nor do they correct its errors; rather, they frame those errors as a necessary expression of the aggiornamento of Vatican II. The wisdom of the Fathers of the Church has taught us to express the truths of the Faith “eodem sensu eademque sententia [with the same meaning and the same judgment],” whereas in this document “the contents are often expressed in a new way in order to respond to the questions of our age” (Ap. Const. Fidei Depositum), yet without addressing those precise questions with the strength and determination they would require. And the more controversial certain aspects of the Magisterium are for the contemporary secularized mentality, the more their exposition is made timid, embarrassed, and partial, as if they did not want to contradict those who are in error. It seems that the very “pastoral” teaching that should have been the hallmark of the first and only “pastoral council” in history is conspicuous only by its absence. There is very little that is “pastoral” in adulterating doctrine or not transmitting it faithfully as Christ ordered: this is rather the behavior of the hireling “cujus non sunt oves propriæ” – whose sheep are not his own – “quia mercenarius est, et non pertinet ad eum de ovibus” – because he is a hireling and has no care for the sheep (Jn 10:12, 13).

But what became of this Aggiornamento, which in its words heralded abundant fruits and a rebirth of Catholicism all over the world after centuries of obscurantism and superstition? It proved to be disastrous in its actions, the reason for the departure of many of the faithful, the cause of a dearth of conversions and a devastating crisis of priestly and religious vocations, as well as an inexorable dissolution of civil society. The so-called “conciliar springtime” has actually proven to be a harsh winter that still shows no signs of ending.

Among the thousand promises of the Council, there was supposed to be a deeper participation in the Holy Sacrifice, a greater understanding of the Sacred Scriptures and a better knowledge of the truths of Faith and Morals. Today, if we asked a catechism teacher what the Gifts of the Holy Spirit are, or what the purposes of the Holy Mass are, we would not get any answer, because the illiteracy that has afflicted the last several generations of Catholics is not a regrettable accident but rather the very goal that the conciliar revolution wanted to attain in the Church. And in all probability not even the parish priest would know the answer. He would object that the formulas of the Catechism are an antiquated notional legacy of the “old religion,” the “pre-council,” and that today “faith must be lived.” But how can one live a faith that is ignored? Not knowing the Mysteries of Religion, the faithful end up belonging to the Church without having conviction, and they become easy prey for the propaganda of heretics and the errors of false shepherds. These false shepherds deprive those who are fighting to defend the Faith and win new souls over to God of the spiritual weapons they need. On the other hand, when we hear it said that “The Lord has redeemed us all, everyone, with the blood of Christ: everyone, not only Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, [even] the atheists?’ Them too. Everyone!” (here) we can also consider the new Catechism to be fully superseded by Bergoglio’s “liquid magisterium” that is instrumental to the establishment of the New World Order and the universal religion.

For the first time in the history of the Church, an Ecumenical Council has been able to insinuate heterodox teachings into the ecclesial body and, coherently, a liturgy that expresses in a new lex orandi a new lex credendi. The Catechism could not be exempted from an adaptation, as had already happened with the Code of Canon Law. As I have been able to declare in my previous interventions, I am persuaded that Catholics – and many Council Fathers – fell into a cunning trap, laid by those wanted to use the authority of a Council to convey a new doctrine, the ideological basis of a new church. Numerous historians and scholars have highlighted the infiltrations of fifth columns of Freemasonry and Modernism at Vatican II, as well as the procedural tricks and deceptions by which first the preparatory schemae and then the documents submitted to the vote of the Bishops were revolutionized.

This alone should be enough to understand that we cannot speak of a “distortion” of the Council nor maintain that there is a difference between the letter and the spirit of Vatican II. What we observe disavows any attempt to hold together the pitiful and lame narrative of the hermeneutic of continuity. Instead we must honestly understand that we have been deceived by an authority that on the one hand declared that it wanted to pursue certain purposes – bringing back those who are far away, making the liturgy more understandable, encouraging the commitment of the laity, etc. – while in reality what was sought was, if not the systematic demolition of the Church, then at the very least her mutation and modernization. How much this foolhardiness on the part of the Shepherds played into the hands of the conspirators, that is, of those who had consciously inserted themselves into the conciliar commissions or were weaving plots in the conventicles of the Modernists and the cenacles of the Masons, we can see today. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is the complete expression of the “spirit of the Council,” of that wicked alliance between deep church and deep state that finds new confirmations every day.

This alliance, made by reason of a idem sentire [affinity of feeling] that any Catholic considers inconceivable, also explains the reason why the new conciliar and Bergoglian church – which fraudulently imposes itself over the true Catholic Church, usurping its offices, authority, and prestige – intended to give a new magisterium, with a new liturgy, a new Code of Canon Law, and a new Catechism. Nor is it a coincidence that Bergoglio has de facto cancelled the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, considering the traditional Mass as an expression of worship incompatible with the ecclesiology of Vatican II and implicitly also recognizing the incompatibility of the Novus Ordo with the Faith of the pre-conciliar Church.

The heart of the present crisis is the crisis of authority in all of its forms; a crisis that has a very close connection to having wanted to dethrone Christ the King, denying Him his divine rights not only in public affairs but even in the Church. And this coup d’état in which the servants of the Enemy have conspired against Our Lord has still not seen the due public reparation that alone is the indispensable premise and the necessary condition for the full restoration of His Kingdom.

May this volume bring about an honest discussion and a sincere examination of conscience, so that once the nature of the disease has been recognized, the necessary treatments may be adopted and future relapses may be prevented. And may Saint Pius X intercede for the Holy Church before the Throne of God.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

August 22, 2021
Immaculati Cordis Beatæ Mariæ Virginis

 

Post a Comment

Archivio