|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Persevere
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Catholic: |
If I am to follow you in arithmetic, I need to know you
are a true arithmetician. Please make a profession of your two-times
table, up to 20. |
| Roman: |
2x2=4; 2x3=6; 2x4=9; 2x5=10; 2x6=13; 2x7=14;
2x8=19; 2x9=18; 2x10=20. |
| Catholic: |
I am afraid you have made three mistakes. Kindly repeat. |
| Roman: |
(He corrects all except 2x8=19). |
| Catholic: |
(Respectfully) I fear you have still made a mistake.
2x8 are not 19. |
| Roman: |
(Gently) No, 2x8=19. That is not a mistake. |
| Catholic: |
(Still respectfully) But how can you say such a thing?
If 2x8 were 19, they would be more than 2x9! |
| Roman: |
(As if inspired) Ah, but I FEEL that 2x8 are 19. That
is my inward EXPERIENCE and my personal NEED! |
| Catholic: |
(Puzzled) But then what makes you say that 2x2=4? |
| Roman: |
(Enthusiastically) Just the same, my inward EXPERIENCE
and my personal NEED! |
| Catholic: |
(Shocked) But the two-times table, like every other part
of the multiplication table, rests upon objective reality! |
| Roman: |
(A little exasperated) Of course its does, but objective
reality must still be assimilated by me, i.e. it must
become my personal experience. |
| Catholic: |
(Slowly) So if today you "assimilate" that
2x2 are 4, but tomorrow "assimilated" that they were
5, then tomorrow they would be 5? |
| Roman: |
(Triumphantly) Exactly! What value would any arithmetical
table have if it was not assimilated by me in accordance with
my present needs? |
| Catholic: |
(Jumping up, and jamming on his baseball-cap sideways!) Get me outa' here! You're CRAZY! (Exit, as fast as his legs can carry him). |
Notice three things. Firstly, the comparison between arithmetic and
Catholic dogma is apposite, insofar as both are a connected body of
objective truths. Thus as the single error that 2x8=19 is enough, if
applied enough, to destroy all arithmetic (then 2x8 is greater than
2x9, so 8 is greater than 9, etc., etc.), so the denial of a single
Catholic dogma is enough to destroy the entire Catholic Faith (dogmas
also interlock), and he who denies a single dogma is a heretic.
Secondly - worse - notice in our comparison how close our Roman seemed to come to objective reality. Had he corrected all three errors and not just two, or had he from the outset recited correctly the whole two-times table, then our Catholic might have thought he was dealing with a Roman Catholic and not with a Roman modernist. Only our Roman's insistence upon 2x8=19 drove our Catholic to discover that our Roman rested his entire multiplication table not upon objective reality but upon his personal inward experience and needs! Similarly today's Rome could come closer and closer to resembling outwardly the true Rome, yet if the very basis upon which it seemed to be the true Rome was, for instance, ecumenical need or modern experience, then the Society would still have to not budge an inch!
But how then will we ever know that the Romans are back to professing the true Faith upon its true basis? Archbishop Lefebvre used to reply: when they subscribe to Pius IX's "Quanta Cura" (against liberalism in politics), to Pius X's Anti-Modernist Oath (against modernism in religion) and to Pius XI's "Quas Primas" (against secularism in society). And the sure sign of the Romans' subscribing sincerely to these papal documents will be when they have no more problem with the SSPX, assuming always that the latter will not have budged. In other words, until the Romans subscribe as above, any Rome-SSPX agreement is impossible, and once they subscribe, it will no longer be necessary! Meanwhile, as the Romans tug towards Conciliar perdition, the one thing that the "schismatic" anchorman must do is not budge one inch from his "schism"!
Notice thirdly from the comparison with arithmetic another tremendous element of deception in our present situation - our Roman as presented above need not be of ill will. He can be a rabid modernist and still a "very nice guy." Of course the ring-leaders of modernism who know exactly what they are doing to detach souls from objective reality, supernatural and natural, are of a diabolical pride and malice, but if our Roman learned from his mother's knee onwards that the multiplication table has an inward basis, how can he think any differently? How can he not be sincere? And if he is sincere, he can be very convincing in defense of his error, as, for instance, Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger and Cardinal Castrillon all seem to be (God alone knows for sure what is in the human heart - Jer. XVII, 9, 10).
Now no amount of sincerity or niceness can turn objective error into objective truth. For if a man wants to preserve ice, what does it matter how sincere he is in thinking that the best way to do so is to expose it to warm sunshine? It will still melt. However, while subjective sincerity cannot change objective reality, it can be deceiving, highly deceiving. Thus the more innocent or ignorant - "sincere" - these Romans are in what is objectively their deluded fight against Catholic reality, the more dangerous any contacts or negotiations with them can be. The SSPX, like any other defender of the objective Catholic Faith, must today and tomorrow beware like the plague of "nice guys" in Rome. As St. Theresa of Avila said, "I do not need my confessor to be a Saint, I do need him to know his Catholic doctrine."
Should then the SSPX have no contact at all with the Romans? No. Even if a man's mother is a leper, he stays by her bedside, while taking care not to catch the illness which would put an end to his being able to look after her. In May I said that the Romans, as holding authority over the Church, have huge influence and responsibility for millions of souls, and they are not necessarily impervious to the Truth - while there is life, there is hope. To which one can add that if by the grace of God the SSPX possesses the Truth, it is the SSPX's duty to make that Truth - prudently - available and accessible to the churchmen who so need it. Also, that Truth will have the effect of discerning the spirits in Rome, and of dividing the Romans who are truly in good faith from those who are not. But how can the little stone of Truth bring down the giant of error (Dan. II, 34, 35) if there is no contact?
My dear friends, let us all persevere in the Truth, however much more difficult yet that may become in the next several years. For if we do persevere, our reward in Heaven will go far beyond anything we can imagine. Let us pray for one another. I will not forget the United States. I send you all my blessing as a bishop. Please support my successor in Winona.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
+ Richard Williamson