A commentary on the present situation of the Church
Dr. E. Heller interviewed by Werner Olles
Introductory remark
The following interview will eventually be published in Junge Freiheit
(=Youth for Freedom), a weekly German political newspaper. Its editor,
however, has given permission for it to appear in Einsicht first.
Though political in nature, Junge Freiheit is also concerned with
revealing the underlying spiritual and religious causes of the
disastrous position in which the Church has been for quite some time
now. This interview is primarily intended for new subscribers to
Einsicht. The aim is to justify the position of Einsicht by explaining
certain problems.
Eberhard Heller
***
Olles: What are your thoughts on the condition of the Church at the beginning of the 21st century?
Heller: Firstly, when you refer
to the “catholic Church” doubtless you have in mind that religious
institution which changed into the “conciliar church” after the reforms
of Vatican II were implemented. This “conciliar church”, though
continuing to call itself the “Roman Catholic Church” has nothing in
common with the pre-Vatican II Church. The reforms, continually
evolving, in the spirit of Vat.II, have resulted in multiple ruptures
with the bi-millennial tradition of the Church. The external trappings
of the Church remain the same in many ways. Certain doctrines of the
pre-Vatican II Church , as well as its hierarchical and juridical
structures are kept, helping to mask the rupture with tradition.
Here is how the traditional Church ‘mutated’ into the ‘conciliar
church’. This mutation was effectuated by: falsifying sacramental
rites, or falsely interpreting their meaning by the negation of certain
dogmas; by corrupting semantics; by pretending moral laws were
relative, and by denying the Church its right to be the sole authentic
custodian and guardian of the truths of salvation as revealed by God.
Instead of this, John Paul II. pretends he is a leader of one of the
numerous religions that exist, all placed on an equal footing, together
with whom he adores ‘God’. This is tantamount to denying the Holy
Trinity. An American religious has drawn up a list of 101 heresies
attributed to John Paul II.
The accusations, being very grave, must be substantiated. I shall
therefore quote from two conciliar documents and their appraisal by a
reliable critic. In Nostra Aetate art. 3, we find: “The Church
also esteems the musulmans, who adore One God, living and substantial,
merciful and mighty, creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to
men”. This affirmation is followed by an other in Lumen Gentium chap.
16: “But the plan of salvation is equally extended to those who
recognise the Creator, in the first place, the musulmans, who having
the faith of Abraham, adore the unique God with us.
In 1970, Paul VI renounced the right of the Church to be the only
true one with this declaration: “There are three religions which all
recognise the true God participating in this (Middle East) conflict:
the Jewish people, Islam, and with them the Christian people spread
throughout the world. With three voices they proclaim monotheism. Their
language is authentic, dignified, historical, indestructible, and
convincing.”
This change of mentality was perceived in Le Monde of 25. 01. 2000. by
Prof. Claude Geffre OP, dean of the Faculty of Theology of Saulchoir:
“During the Vatican II Council, the Catholic Church discovered and
accepted that she did not have the monopoly of the truth, that she had
to listen to the world (…) Religions which oppose these legitimate
needs are bound either to reform or to disappear”. On the other hand,
Christ says: “Nobody comes to the Father but by Me (John 14,6); for ”
he who does not have the Son, does not have the Father either”( I John
2,23). In these quotations, there is no room for “tolerance”!
It is not possible for a Pope or the Magisterium of the Church to
radically change or falsify fixed doctrines without calling the divine
Revelation of the truth into question as the absolute point of
reference; or without the Church renouncing thereby to be the supreme
Institute of the truth. What was valid in the Church yesterday will
also remain so today and tomorrow.
The reforms after Vat. II. were introduced surreptitiously, and here we
shall spotlight just one example illustrating the limits of moral
decadence: the generalised approval of abortion in which the conciliar
church of Germany was implicated until recently. Consultation centres
were set up at the behest of the bishops which pregnant women in
distress could turn to as a last resort to receive a certificate which
was the same as giving them the “right” to abortion; ‘licences to kill’
they had even be called…
To be fair, it has to be said that there were many who were not aware
of the new official orientation of the hierarchy. In general,
rank and file Catholics are still of the mind that the ‘conciliar
church’ is the true catholic Church, especially since ordinary
Catholics are not competent enough to form a theological judgment
on the reforms which have falsified Church doctrine. The imposture is
augmented by semantic corruption. The younger generation, not having
known otherwise, could not have detected the imposture because the
reforms have become like a tradition themselves in the meantime. One
can also add that it has not been possible for them to know of the
situation because of the failure of those who did remain faithful to
Church doctrine to make it known! Amongst the ordinary Catholics
there is scarcely one to be found competent enough to know the
theological and dogmatic differences between Catholic doctrine and its
protestant versions. The older Catholics have become used to the
liturgical reforms, but often enough they tempered these with
traditional doctrines of the past. The Mass or rather the ‘mass’
is said in the vernacular of the country concerned, so it is more
difficult to ascertain that these ‘masses’ are invalid because of
certain falsifications introduced into them. In some cases, this
‘church’ has even been able to partially exert a stabilising
social effect, e.g. , in many rural parishes. .
The rifts in the ‘conciliar church’ are evident. You have
revolutionaries on the periphery with their well defined, well
programmed course of action. I would place John Paul II in this
category. Reports from Messori, an Italian ‘insider’ journalist,
confirm this. Yet others, clergy and laity, remain emotionally
attached to catholicism…To give you an eloquent example of the internal
rifts amongst the ‘conciliar church’ hierarchy, I refer you to a
statement made by cardinal Kasper purporting to the document Domins
Jesus (probably edited by card. Ratzinger, if we are to judge by the
style). A good part of this document is catholic, and yet Kasper, who
had just received the cardinal’s hat, criticised this document, saying
it was “too demanding” . It obliged one (!) to the Faith! And to
think that this document was issued from precisely that institution
which enabled him to become a cardinal…
Apart from the theological betrayals, difficult to apprehend, the
fruits of the reforms are not only visible but measurable: the mass
desertion of churches, the dramatic decline in priestly and religious
vocations, the doing away with Missionary activity and the silence of
the ‘conciliar church” as a moral authority. To sum up we could say: “
the Roman Catholic Church’s former prerogative as the Institute of
Salvation has been suppressed. Those who were aware of the
revolutionary nature of the changes have not gone into hiding, but it
is true that they are living in a new diaspora situation. And cardinal
Scheffczyk prof. em. of dogma at the University of Munich,
speaking of the ‘autodestruction of the Church’ states categorically:
”One has to be realistic and have understanding for the many Catholics
who are lost, perplexed and even deceived at the present time.”
(Theologisches July 02).
Olles: Who were the principle opponents of the pre-conciliar, anti-modernistic Church?
Heller: Since the French
Revolution, the Church ahs been increasingly banished from the public
sphere, and is relegated to the private life of individuals.
Religion has now become a purely personal affair! Now a short time
before the French Revolution, the Church endured despotism in the form
of Josephenism… As well as that rationalism influenced the
process of de-christianisation and secularisation. Now the
aim of Freemasonry was to ‘overthrow the throne and the altar’
and to subvert the Church. It is interesting to discover threats
of revolutionary ideas previously defined by the Illuminati, in
several conciliar decrees. The post-conciliar hierarchy offered no
resistance and promptly agreed to comply with the requirement of
Judaism (B’nai B’rith) to eliminate the so-called anti-Semitic elements
from the liturgy.
To these forces antagonistic to the Church could also be added the
‘inferiority complexes’ of many theologians who considered themselves
hemmed in by the Church since the 19th century. They felt they had been
excluded from scientific evolution. This explains why, after the
Vatican II council they were still more inclined to adopt modern
scientific theories. And last but not least, what was decisive for the
revolution in the Church on a world-wide scale was that “the revolution
started from the top…”.
Olles: Globally speaking, what line of resistance has the tradition been able to offer at present?
Heller: Following the Vatican
II council when not only were we struck by the reformist character of
its documents, but we saw that the very dogmas of Catholicism were
being altered, with very grave consequences, numerous were those who
came forth in those early days to combat these reforms. E.g. the
promulgation of the so-called N.O.M. (novus ordo missae) of Paul VI was
rapidly followed by the “Brief critical analysis of the N.O.M.) signed
by the cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, in which the grave theological
errors of the new rite were revealed.
In this context it is revealing to note what cardinal Ratzinger had to
say about the liturgical reforms. According to him, it was not ‘a
revival’ but a devastation. “ I am convinced, “ he writes, “that the
crisis of the Church we are traversing at the present time is to a
large extend due to the breakdown of the liturgy”. (“My Life, Memoirs
1927-1997, Rome 1997).
Even some reputable Greek orthodox and protestant theologians raised
their voices to warn against the introduction of the Novus Ordo.
Resistance groups on a world-wide scale were organised to maintain the
traditional Mass, and Latin as the language of the Church. Lay people
as well as the clergy formed part if them; public figures as well as
scientists. There were journalists and renowned theologians who
joined their voices to those of committed lay people. The international
federation ‘Una Voce’ was granted juridical status. The group
“Freundeskreis der Una Voce” was founded in Munich in 1966 and I am its
current president. Mgr Lefebvre founded his international seminary,
attracting many seminarians. A lot of ‘Resistance’ journals in the
major languages appeared. Amongst them the theological periodical
Einsicht , published since 1971 in Munich by the group “Freundeskreis
der Una Voce”.
But an internal rift amongst the traditionalists was looming on the
horizon. Traditional Catholics were receiving differing theological
critiques of the reform decrees. Analyses of the N.O.M. formed the bulk
of them. Whilst the first group was only aware of some liturgical
discrepancies in this ordo, others discovered very grave dogmatic
falsifications in it, signifying that ‘ masses’ celebrated in this rite
were invalid. Consequently the legitimacy as Pope of the promulgator of
such a new-styled ordo was brought into question…
Though this second line of criticism analysed the problem more
profoundly, it was the first category of objectors to the N.O.M. , with
its more readily-seized conclusions which ultimately gained more
adherents amongst traditional Catholics. And it is at this point that
two wings were formed in the ranks of those Catholics faithful to the
tradition: the traditionalists and the sedevacantists. In a way, the
former could be compared to an orthodox sect within the conciliar
church., leading a “quarrel of rites” which has never been resolved.
The Catholics following the sedevacantist wing believe that, the See of
Peter is vacant, and this difference between the traditionalist
and sedevacantist mainstreams continues to this day.
For a long time the chef de file or figurehead of the traditionalists
was Mgr. Lefebvre. The leader of the sedevacantists was Mgr
Ngô-dinh-Thuc, former archbishop of Hué, Vietnam, brother of the former
Catholic president Ngô-dinh-Diem of Vietnam, assassinated by the
Americans with Vatican approval. It is with his public Declaratio
concerning the vacancy of the Holy See, dated 23.02.1982, at Munich,
that Mgr. Ngô-dinh-Thuc provided the fundamental theological
Charter for the sedevacantists.
If you ask me about the assets of these two groups, I can tell you that
the run-of - the mill traditionalists pivoting around Mgr
Lefebvre have an impressive number of adherents, but the arguments they
present to defend their point of view in forums and debates can only be
qualified as poor. The sedevacantists on the other hand, are able to
present watertight arguments, but numerically they are only a minority.
This wing is more strongly represented in Mexico. Sociologically
speaking, these two groups play a rather insignificant role. To date
what we lack is directive unity on the pastoral front. Till this is
achieved, no effective restoration of the Church as a salvific
Institute is possible.
Olles: In the aftermath of syncretism, what is the amplitude of the devastation of the concept of apostolicity?
Heller: Apostolicity signifies
that the Church is founded on the apostles, who are called by Christ to
succeed Him; it also means a continued, ever-identical doctrinal line,
on the one hand; and on the other it means the apostolic succession of
the hierarchy, i.e. the uninterrupted transmission of powers to
consecrate bishops and ordain priests so as to guarantee the existence
of the Church as an Institute of salvation.
The apostolic succession is endangered in our times because of
the new rites for Holy Orders- invalid or doubtful at the least – which
have been introduced. The danger is for episcopal and sacerdotal powers
to thus cease to exist; On the other hand, apostolicity is suppressed
(from the conciliar church) by the fact that Rome abdicates the powers
and dogmas transmitted to the apostles. As an example let us consider
the dogma “outside of the Church there is no salvation”. The conciliar
church renounces this dogma. This means that it does not claim to be
the only true Church any more than any other Christian Confessions. In
fact, the conciliar church recognises them as having equal rights.
More, it assures us that Islam, Judaism and the other world religions
are also legitimate ways to work out one’s salvation. This is why the
conciliar church itself renounces any pretence of being the true,
unique Institute of salvation. So, the ‘Pope’ of the conciliar church
joins the phalanx of ‘dignitaries of equal rights’ of other religions
in order to achieve a ‘peaceful coexistence’.
This syncretism supplants pre-VaticanII Missionnary activity, now
effectively abandoned. Yet, even the scandalous, syncretic gestures of
the usurper- pope of the conciliar church (John Paul II kissing the
Coran!) and the inter-faith assemblies in no way means that those
other religions respect the idea of peaceful co-existence. In Sudan,
Christians are continually being killed; even in Turkey they are
persecuted and subject to discrimination. Imagine St. Peter negociating
“peaceful coexistence”, preaching on good will to all men to the
Roman Emperor, whilst only a short distance away, in the arena of this
same emperor, men who were not of such good will were throwing
Christians to be devoured by wild beasts! How
cynical!
Olles: Is Œcumenism one of the consequences of the spiritual starvation of souls through the conciliar church?
Heller: The term Œcumenism
along with some others, has undergone change of meaning due to semantic
corruption by the modernists. Initially this term referred to an
assembly of particular churches . It is in this sense that an
œcumenical council was referred to in the past. Today the emphasis on
concrete efforts made to unite all Christian denominations.
Before the Vatican II council efforts were made to iron out the scandal
of divisions by searching for solutions to the problems of those times.
(I think here of the regrettably failed Unification attempt with the
Orthodox church under the reign of Pius XI.). Nowadays, they try to
advance matters by avoiding confrontations with Catholic truths. For
them, “unity” has priority over divine Revelation. Œcumenism understood
this way is rather the objective aimed at and desired by the
promulgators of the reforms. Let us now go back to the Common
Declaration the doctrine on Justification , the aim of which was to get
a “nuanced concensus”. Bishop Karl Lehmann, recently promoted to the
college of cardinals himself qualified Martin Luther as a doctor of the
church without the slightest protest from the conciliar
authorities despite the fact that Luther is condemned as a heretic by
the Church…Because of its theological indifference there are some I
know who have left the conciliar church in order to reintegrate
traditional Catholicism. If it is a fact that ordinary Catholics are
insisting on yet more œcumenism it is because they do not understand
why all these Christian Confessions professing practically the same
Faith should continue to exist as different Christian denominations or
organisations.
The conciliar church’s abandonment of the truths contained in the
dogmas of the Faith has produced an arbitrary mentality concerning
doctrinal content, and this has given place to a “patchwork”
Christianity, where each one is free to fabricate his own “theology” as
best he can.
Olles: Till now Catholics
having remained faithful to the Tradition have been treated as outcasts
by the modernists. Now, however, one can qualify the latter’s
antagonism as persecution. Do you expect to be formally accused of
anti-church activities with your names put on a black list?
Heller: We are not directly
persecuted, even though we are defamed as fundamentalists or
hard-liners; The conciliar church lacks the means for this: neither can
we be attacked for political activism. Our line of action is to
continue on as the Church did before the council. But priests opposing
the conciliar church are certainly disadvantaged. Maybe M. Fridmann ,
the current president of the central council of Jews in Germany (who
still retains this position despite having received many reproaches)
will one day have the idea of accusing us of anti-Semitism because we
keep to the traditional liturgy of Good Friday. But I doubt it.
Olles: … The New Mass,
religious liberty, the rights of man against the authority of God… what
fundamental truths would you oppose to these concepts?
Heller: We maintain that
absolute Truth exists, that it became flesh in Christ and that there is
only one true religion. After that we are convinced that He, the
God-Man, condescended to us. He abased Himself to our misery in order
to manifest His love and mercy. By His sacrificial death He offered
fallen man the possibility of being reconciled with God. By the Holy
sacrifice of the mass He offers men the possibility of renewing His
reconciliation without any discontinuity. It is by Him that they will
enter into the new Alliance, the guarantee of reconciliation and peace
amongst men.
Olles: What advice could be offered to Catholics who wish to remain faithful to the apostolic and ecclesiastical tradition?
Heller: They should first
strive to hold had to the Faith and to deepen their knowledge of
Catholic Doctrine. There are many Catholics who have lost their
orientation because they received their faith through their
conciliar education i.e. through the “new tradition”. As the world
today has adopted many erroneous religious concepts and doctrines of
salvation, it could be asked how we can know nowadays that the Christ
is really the Son of God Whom we may justly believe in. One day M.
Gliwitzky , the first president of our association said: “ The fact
that for a long time we have been used to renounce the intelligence of
Faith is one of the deepest roots of the crisis we are living through.
Therefore all our efforts should be concentrated (by the aid of certain
signs) on distinguishing when we simply have an opinion, when we
believe, and when we know something is the truth. Without a firm
conviction about elementary truths of the Faith, in these times we are
prey to a refined relativism. Integration into the Church is a problem
because a stable organisation representing the pre-council Church does
not exist, or yet exist. But I am ready to inform any interested
Catholics adequately.
Olles: Do you think that after the deviations in the Faith and Liturgy wrought by Vatican II the Church could be restored?
Heller: For some time now we
have been working out a plan to rebuild the Church as the Institute of
salvation. But this leads to problems of theology and of organisation.
For there has never been a similar situation in the history of the
Church comparable to the one we are living in today. To surmount the
crisis means to set out on unknown territory from the
theological, juridical and practical points of view. This
requires efforts surpassing our competence. It would not suffice for
John Paul II or the bishops e.g., to go back to the sources to rectify
tomorrow all the decisions taken up till today, and so stop the
deviations. If a dignitary of the hierarchy has fallen into
heresy, he loses his office and is inapt to reoccupy it, even
supposing he converts. ( See papal Bull “Cum ex apostolatus officio “
of Paul IV). This means that the restoration of the Church could not be
effected by this category of dignitaries. But, because we lack unified
pastoral direction to date we have been unable to make any notable
progress in the re-edification of the Church as the Institute of
salvific grace.
Olles: Do you think that Germany and the West could be spiritually revived, or are we already lost?
Heller: For more than twenty
five years I’ve been hearing of private revelations, true or false, in
which a resurgence of spiritual life is announced in the wake of
catastrophes or conflicts. I don’t lend faith to any of them. I see how
things are and the way they are developing. It is a fact that
Germany and the West have been shaped by Christianity. Even if society
does not want to recognise this reality, it is a fact that the
disastrous universal de-christianisation can only be a proof of
apostasy and a betrayal of the Christian social order. The moral
torpidity of the Germans regarding abortion serves as a clear example
of this: more than 60% of so-called Catholics were in favour of the
present legislation § 218 permitting abortions. About three
hundred thousand infants die aborted yearly. Now, a nation which
kills its children will die itself. The apostasy of the Faith is
not without repercussions politically and socially either. Any
conservative political movement, or any party which is ideologically
based on the revolutionary principles of the conciliar church is bound
to doom, because success is based on the strength of the ideological
concepts it represents. Think of Œcumenism or syncretism . These ideas
which were basically formulated in the Church, are echoed in the
multicultural concepts of politics. Take the Balkans for example. For
years now, we have seen its effects in the Balkans. Unless the Faith is
revived there will be no rebuilding of the Church nor a restoration of
society. Till now, there is no sign of the happening.
Olles: In the Bible it is said:
“… And you will know the truth and the truth will set you free”. Are we
still in a position of being able to support the truth?
Heller: We can serve revealed
Truth if we are ready to serve it humbly. Then it will set us free
because we show we wish to lead our lives in the love of Christ and by
Him. But what does this humility mean? It means admitting that we need
the help of others. In the present case, it means we need the salvation
of Christ and are prepared to accept His help. But will the
self-sufficient, pleasure-orientated consumer society of today ever
understand this!
Olles: What concrete steps have you taken to be recognised as a legal juridical institution?
Heller: This question is being
debated. Concretely it means finding out whether we can form a society
with public rights, or whether we would have to be integrated in a
federation of associations in the State Register. Some such
associations have existed since 1976 when the traditional Mass was
officially forbidden. The next step would be to decide what name to
give it.
Eberhard Heller
|
