Author Topic: Story’s of priests during the 60s (Read 2630 times)

CatholicInAmerica · « **on:** October 26, 2019, 10:36:58 PM »

Please share any story you know about priests who protested against the V2 changes during the 60s and refused to say the new mass, priests who left their pensions etc. very very interested in this topic of true Catholic priests who fought against modernism in their diocese. All trades know who lefebvre is but I’m trying to recognize the unknown priests. Also include what happened to them after they fought against the heresy.

Thanks

Merry · « **Reply #1 on:** October 28, 2019, 10:06:33 AM »

This is actually a very good topic. Below are the Preface and Intro and Seminary sections to the biography of Fr. James F. Wathen, probably best known for writing The Great Sacrilege (the book that Bishop Lazo said reading made him turn from the New Church and back to Tradition. Many, many people give credit to that book for opening their eyes about the New Mass and inspiring them to seek and fight for the True Mass.) I add the seminary section as it shows that life and particular training Fr. was providentially able to undergo. (The full bio is available at FatherWathen.com)

PREFACE

On November 7, 2006, Father James F. Wathen went to his eternal reward. His death went unnoticed by the world at large. Though he had faithfully served his Lord and Master as a Catholic priest for forty-eight years, Father’s Requiem Latin Mass – the Tridentine, “True Mass” – had to be held at the funeral home where his wake had been. It was located across the street from the very cathedral of his old diocese. He had been ordained at that cathedral, but now its doors were closed to him. Even the “traditional Catholic” media, which typically mourns the loss of those conservative priests who made an effort to stand up to the corrupt modernist hierarchy, generally gave him barely a mention or a murmur.

Fr. Wathen, however, was not a nobody. His “parish” extended from Massachusetts to Texas, from Minnesota to Tennessee and even to Florida. He published two definitive books on the crisis in the Church, had a radio program in a few large cities and was spiritual director for hundreds of souls.

What, then, made him a pariah even among many of his own? It was the simple fact that Father took a hard-line position against the sacrilegious “New Mass” and the heresy of ecuмenism, both of which had come to pass in the twentieth century especially through the Second Vatican Council. He was unwilling to coexist peacefully with, as he called it, the “mass of Baal” – the Novus Ordo Missae. And he also maintained, as Jesus Christ and His “One True Church” had taught for 2,000 years, that to be saved one must be a Catholic and die in the state of grace.

When more fully understood, these ironical details of Fr. James Wathen’s life and death will define a most extraordinarily dedicated Catholic priest of our tumultuous age. This book will prove that it was supposed to be that way. By this we mean that because Father remained a faithful servant of Christ, he was persecuted. Our Lord said, "The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you" (Jn 15:20).

Fr. Wathen’s response to the anti-Catholic and progressive Vatican II ideas being forced upon him during his early parish years, was to remain faithful to his oaths and orthodox priestly formation with its training, and to fulfill Christ’s 2,000-year-old command to teach His Apostolic doctrine. He therefore was adhering to St. Paul's exhortation: "… reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine" (2Tim 4:2). This, Father steadfastly did until his final days – in season and out of season. He was well aware, and never forgot, that during the papacy of Pope St. Pius X, the radical modernist movement in the Church already stood anathematized – that the Catholic Church through Pius, had condemned the Modernists and their errors via both the encyclical letter Pascendi in 1907, and later the syllabus Lamentabilis. When the stubborn resurgence of Modernism took place especially after Vatican II, Fr. Wathen was ready. It was what Pope Pius intended: a last-resort vanguard of resisting priests, even bishops. But to our sorrow, we now well know how that resistance was hardly a vanguard. And in his diocese, Fr. Wathen stood alone.

Those who accepted these false reforms – bishops, priests, lay people – became “Novus Ordo Catholics.” Also called “Conciliar” Catholics as being followers of the Second Vatican Council, many of these people became Father’s actual persecutors. In their minds he had become a radical heretic and had even left the Faith. But Father determined to do his priestly duty, by keeping safe within the Church's traditions as many other souls as possible – as many other souls who also were concerned, and who wanted to keep their baptismal promises of loyalty to Our Lord and His Church. Pope St. Pius predicted that such faithful, anti-modernist Catholics would be called "Traditionalists." And so they are.

Though he was fearless in speaking the truth, generally utilizing his unparalleled vocabulary in doing so, Fr. Wathen could also be gentle as a lamb when such was needed. He was a true shepherd to many souls who had become confused or abandoned sheep in the aftermath of Vatican II – those people who now found their parishes strange places of innovation and sacrilege.

In the years which followed, whether at home or making his “missionary rounds,” Father became known for his manner of offering Holy Mass, his efficacious if not striking sermons and real aptitude for writing; also his excellent sense of humor with its exceedingly dry wit, what seemed untiring energy – and his love of the fight: "For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places" (Eph. 6:12). Better than most, Father knew what was going on.

He acknowledged having a particular delight in, and love for, theology. He also was blessed with an extraordinary gift for discerning the scriptural Epistles of St. Paul. With seeming ease Father could interpret and explain the meanings and applications of the Apostle in a manner that was both enlightning and useful, impressive and rare. And this despite how even according to St. Peter, the writings of St. Paul were "hard to be understood" (2Peter 3:16).

Fr. Wathen left behind neither will nor burial instructions. He was aware of having a plot in the Catholic cemetery next to his mother and father. His brothers John and Thomas, who arranged for his funeral, also knew of this grave site. But there was never any actual consideration given to the use of the cathedral for his funeral. Not only would the Novus Ordo authorities probably not permit it, but the structure itself was no longer a fitting location as, at best, it was now but a place "to keep fruit" (Ps 78:1). The sacrilegious Novus Ordo “Mass" desecrates any church structure where it is offered (Canon 1172, Par. 1.3). And that was why, as so often he had done for others who also had rejected the modernist Church, Fr. Wathen’s Requiem Mass was simply offered in the funeral home. Because of this and of also having never offered the “New Mass” himself, it can be said that Father was successful indeed; even in death he remained triumphant in orthodoxy.

This book, then, is the loving tribute of a flock to its shepherd. Not in the spirit of a cult-like panegyric, but as a grateful gesture of appreciation. It is what Fr. Wathen deserves. It is being written while thoughts are still fresh and memories still alive.

Father would be the first to say he had regrets indeed; he made mistakes, was far from perfect – and at times downright failed. But he knew the perfect and only cause to attempt dedicating himself and expending his priesthood during this turbulent Catholic era – that to keep his oath of allegiance to Jesus Christ and His Church was the only thing to do. And many are the souls who thank Almighty God for that.

Merry · « **Reply #2 on:** October 28, 2019, 10:10:17 AM »

INTRODUCTION

            What is the essence of the priesthood? In his book, Christ the Ideal of the Priest, the great teacher, theologian, holy Abbot and Pauline master Dom Columba Marmion, O.S.B., defines for us the sublime mediatorship of the Catholic priest:

            What is the essence of the priesthood? The Epistle to the Hebrews gives us a celebrated definition. "Every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in the things that appertain to God, that he may offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins" –   Omnis pontifex ex hominibus assumptus pro hominibus constituitur in iis quae sunt ad Deum, ut offerat dona et sacrificia pro peccatis (Heb. v.1)

            The priest is the mediator who offers to God oblations and sacrifices in the name of the people. In return God chooses him to communicate to men His gifts of grace, of mercy and of pardon. The special excellence of the priesthood springs from this mediation.

            From what source does Christ hold His priesthood? St. Paul gives us the answer. The priesthood, he tells us, is of such grandeur that no one, not even Christ in His humanity, has been able to assume for Himself this dignity. Nec quisquam sumit sibi honorem sed qui vocatur a Deo – sic et Christus non semetipsum clarificavit, ut pontifex fieret. Then he continues: "The Father Himself has established His Son as eternal priest; He has said to Him: Filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te – Tu es sacerdos in aeternum" (Heb. v. 4-6).

            Thus the priesthood is a gift bestowed on the humanity of Jesus by the Father. As soon as the Word was made flesh the eternal Father looked on His Son with infinite complacency. He acknowledged Him as the one mediator between heaven and earth, a pontiff forever.

            As Man-God, Christ was to have the privilege of uniting in Himself the whole of humanity to purify it, to sanctify it and to bring it back to the bosom of the divinity. By this, He was to render to the Lord a perfect glory in time and in eternity.

            He did not need to be consecrated by an external anointing like other priests. The soul of Jesus Christ was not stamped with the ineffaceable priestly character as was ours on the day of our ordination. Why? We touch here on the very heart of the mystery. By virtue of the hypostatic union the Word enters into and takes possession of the soul and the body of Jesus; He consecrates them. When the Son of God became flesh He took complete possession of this humanity. The moment of the priestly consecration of Christ was the moment of His Incarnation; at that moment Christ was marked for ever as the one eternal mediator between man and God. "He was anointed with the oil of gladness," says St. Paul (Heb. 1:9), for the Word Himself was this anointing of infinite sanctity. Jesus is the priest par excellence. "For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled and made higher than the heavens" (Heb. vii. 26). Until the end of time the priests of the earth will receive no power which is not part of His; He is the one source of the whole priesthood which glorified God in the manner conceived by Him.

            In order to enter more deeply into the mystery of this marvelous priestly

consecration, let us consider the coming of the angel to Nazareth. Mary is in prayer, she is full of grace. The angel, who has been sent as an ambassador, delivers a message to her. What is the message? That the Word has chosen her womb as the nuptial chamber in which to espouse humanity: "The Holy Spirit will descend upon you," and Mary replies: "Be it done unto me according to thy word" (Luke 1:33-38). At this sacred moment the first priest is consecrated and the voice of the Father resounds in heaven: "Thou art a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech" (Ps. cix. 4).

            Mary thus becomes in all truth the House of Gold, the Ark of the Covenant, the tabernacle in which human nature was united to the Word, and by this very union Jesus was established for ever in His role as mediator. (Christ the Ideal of the Priest, by Abbot Marmion, O.S.B.)



            Father James F. Wathen was a priest of such mettle as the Abbot here describes – a priest who understood what his priesthood was about. "A Kentucky priest?" some may say. But unknown to many, Kentucky had been both destination and home to Catholics since before 1776 and the American Revolution – so much so that when the original American see of Baltimore was subdivided by Rome in 1808, it was the Bardstown, Kentucky area which joined Boston, New York and Philadelphia as one of four new dioceses.

     In his own inimitable style – a firm, realistic combination of the Faith and our human nature, blended with a humility that was always aware of one's true place in the scheme of things – Fr. Wathen once rendered some reflections about the priesthood. After almost fifty years of priestly labor during this era of Modernism, and just over a year before his death, he wrote:

     One of the most arresting truths of our Faith, which lay people understand as well as priests, is that in the priesthood, Our Lord, Jesus Christ imparted His supernatural power to men, for the benefit of all Catholics, the universal Church, and all the people of the whole world. What it means for a priest to forgive people their sins, to preach to them, to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and give them Holy Communion, we understand to some degree, though we cannot express it adequately in words. We all appreciate this fact more poignantly now that most priests have lost their way, and have short-circuited (in a manner of speaking) their priestly power. Conciliar priests do not teach Catholic doctrine, they hear few confessions, and offer a sacrilegious "mass." Whether they give the Body of Christ to communicants is a burning question. Many who are thought to be priests, and think of themselves as such, are doubtfully so; which means they may not have any priestly power at all. The implications of such a thought are too forbidding to speak.

            For these reasons, we Traditionalist priests cannot help but recognize the preciousness of our vocations, and lament the paucity of our number. The number of Latin Rite priests who are doing what they are supposed to be doing is small and will, evidently, continue to diminish. We who remain will consider ourselves favored by God, as long as He allows us to remain on earth in His blessed service. There is the additional consideration that none of us is anxious to depart and meet our stern Judge, whom we have served so poorly.

            The priest, no matter how pure his intentions, is well aware that he is the boy David in Saul's armor, no more worthy of his dignity and power than any other man who did not receive the call. At the same time, every priest, when he sits in the confessional, when he preaches, when he stands at the altar, when he distributes Holy Communion, thinks to himself that, for all his many sins and limitations, these are the things he was created to do, and they are the very best things any man can possibly do. He has no reason to envy anyone, or to ask God for something more. When he pronounces the words of absolution, he thinks: What a thing you do! Absolve men of their sins, which no one else can do, no king, no president, no judge. They can remit the sentence, but only you and God can forgive the sin.

            When a priest preaches, he thinks: How do you dare admonish them, or exhort them, so many of whom are so much better than you, who carry much heavier burdens than you, whose prayer is humbler than yours, who suffer more patiently than you?

            When the priest offers Holy Mass, when he pronounces the words of Consecration, he thinks: O unworthy man, what a thing you do! Who can fathom the mind of God, that He would endow such power to the likes of you! That He would depend upon you to offer the Lamb that was slain in Sacrifice, without which the world would be without grace, without defense, without hope, without love, without amity with the infinite God!

            When a priest gives Holy Communion, he thinks: They come to you, some of them for many miles, some of them after a long hunger, the old, the young, the rich, the poor, the fervent, the tepid, the well, the ill, some in chronic pain, some burdened with sorrow, in need of divine Food and Drink. You who have nothing of any value give these faithful souls the Bread of Heaven, the Beloved of the Father, the Word Made Flesh. How do you dare, you who are as unworthy as your Gift is great! Truly, to be worthy of such a calling one would have to be Another Christ!

About ten years after making his Profession of the Catholic Faith¹ and taking the Oath Against Modernism2 at his ordination, Fr. Wathen had the supreme test of faith, and a better understanding of the

___________________

[1] Profession of the Catholic Faith – Formal, detailed reaffirmation of the truths and primary doctrines of the Catholic religion.

²The Oath Against Modernism – This Oath was imposed by Pope St. Pius X, "the Foe of Modernism," and was taken by all priests at their ordination from 1910 until 1967 – when its requirement was dropped as part of "the changes" of the Second Vatican Council.

ingredients of that faith. This descendant of the hardy Catholic pioneers of what is termed “Kentucky's Holy Land," had a momentous decision to make. At the same time his commitment to prudent obedience was tested. For the price of passing this test was the loss of almost everything a good priest is generally considered to need: He lost his bishop, the friendship and long-established society of his brother priests; he lost his chancellor office and library support, his income, his lodging, his food, his insurance and his transportation. Fr. Wathen realized the time had come when he no longer could remain functioning and participating in his parish or his diocese: The Bishop was ordering implementation of the Vatican II "changes," especially the Novus Ordo Missae: The “New Mass.”

     Father suddenly became in the words of his old associates, the Renegade Priest. He was separated by this one decision from everything – save Christ and his sacred priesthood. By this fact, however, he and Christ created an insurmountable majority. This was his strength, his consolation, his raison d’être. From the

moment Fr. Wathen stood to face his modernist bishop and resolutely declare, “I will never say that Mass,” he was an outcast. Eventually Father was allowed to depart his diocese with the understanding that he was taking a “leave of absence.” The bishop was hoping for a compromised change of mind.

Father never returned.

This book intends to not only follow Fr. Wathen's diocesan drama, but what became of him afterwards. During the years just previous to his 1958 ordination and up to the directives of Vatican II, Father had intensely watched and researched every major political and Catholic international development. He realized there was nothing of a sanctifying nature in these modernist ideas and innovations; all were political or ecuмenical liberalizations totally bent on the deification of man and creation of a new humanistic religion. The Novus Ordo "Mass" was no longer a sacrifice but a Protestant meal and a forum for human self-worship. Vatican II was but another destructive revolution. Such judgments were quickly and easily reached by Fr. Wathen. Both his faith and his special understanding and love of the Sacred Magisterium, helped to impel his decision about what to do in the wake of the Council. The primary problem he still faced concerned what true obedience would now require of him, and how he was to implement its demands.

            When he finally acted upon his decision to put distance between himself and the sacrileges required by the treacherous hierarchy, there still remained several sources of nearly unbearable anxiety for Father to endure. This came in the form of the fellow Catholics who surrounded him but who did not support him. All of Fr. Wathen's relationships – family, social, educational and even that of his old seminary confreres – turned out to be illusionary Catholic ones. For suddenly as they moved on with "the changes" and he did not, Father was no longer one of them. As with the case of many other traditional Catholics, though Father continued practicing the same Catholicism as they all had until then, he now was blamed for having changed by those who had actually done the changing! Catholic family acquaintances convinced the Wathens that it was Father who was the maverick, the rebel – and nothing could convince them otherwise. Their thinking was: If all the priests and bishops were of the same mind in supporting the changes of Vatican II, how could this young, apparent “radical” be right? Having lost the support of his immediate family, Fr. Wathen now stood alone. He had only his “Christ crucified,” and later the widely scattered faithful elect who had recognized the apostolic voice of this true, good shepherd priest. “I know Mine and Mine know Me” (Jn. 10:14). This faithful flock in a sense, now became his family.

Any of the benefits and necessary accoutrements usually due an active, devoted parish priest, and which he forfeited by leaving his bishop and diocese, were later supplied to him by Divine Providence. Fr. Wathen was never heard to complain or concern himself about money anxieties. He was never heard to remonstrate about what he left behind in his effort to remain orthodox. But once years later, when conducting a Gospel meditation in a chapel and near the Blessed Sacrament, it was noticed that Father pronounced with some emotion this exchange of words between Our Lord and His Apostles: "When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, did you want anything? But they said: Nothing" (Lu. 22:35-36). Father may well have been thinking then of the providential care in which his material needs had been met since walking away from diocesan security. Unlike so many priests who could not make the necessary break, a hireling he was not. This was no ordinary person. As it turned out, he was the only one of eighty-seven priests from the Owensboro, Kentucky diocese who did not apostatize.

What demarcates this priest from the multitude of so many others? It was his response to the Second Vatican Council, which both commenced, and rudely brought its results to bear early-on in Father's sacerdotal career. It caused him to make decisions that were different, very different, from the decisions made by 99 percent of other Catholic priests world-wide. Vatican II, a General Council of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, was called to make so-called needed “reforms” and to “update” the Church’s attitude to meet modern times. True Catholics know that this Council, held from 1962 to 1965, proved itself to be neither holy nor Catholic. And it was pastoral, not dogmatic – in reality it changed none of the doctrines it attacked. It was, indeed, driven by the enemies of Christ. There were no true, holy, "good faith" reforms suggested at this Council – but sudden, unexpected, anti-Catholic revolutionary demands, later especially felt at the targeted diocesan and parish levels. A progressive “New” Church was put in place by the Modernists in attendance through their Blitzkrieg-type maneuvers and manipulations – with a slow-to-no response from the stunned conservative bishops looking on. And it showed Fr. James F. Wathen to be one of the few alert priests in the entire world. 3

If Fr. Wathen was part of the 1 percent of priests who remained “good shepherds,” where would the faithful flock come from? As events unfolded there was possibly only 3 to 5 percent of the world's entire Catholic population whose faith told them these new ideas of Vatican II were not truly Catholic, and who refused to change – a small percentage indeed who did not succuмb to this general, world apostasy. All the influences of Modernism, liberalism, humanism, Protestantism, materialism, Communism, evolutionism, and atheism – with militant support from an accompanying TV, radio, movie, and publication frenzy – created a deluge which practically drowned traditional Catholicism. From one continent to the next this sacrilegious torrent flooded each parish and monastery, each school and chancellery, each convent, rectory and cathedral.

But there were those sheep who heard the rescuing voices of such as Fr. Wathen. God’s way is the simple way. Let the elect separate themselves as they have always done, and by this He separates the wheat from the chaff – the sheep from the goats. Our Savior may well have let this happen to His Church as a type of purge, thus letting the world see what takes place when Christ and His teachings are abandoned. “I am the way, the truth and the life” (Jn.14:6). Some call this “traditional” counter-struggle a "movement." Actually, a movement it was not – but a refusal to move, a standing pat by keeping the Faith. "I set the Lord always in my

____________________________

3 See Have We Catholics Been Fooled? in the Docuмents/Tutorial section for a brief history of the current revolution in the Church.

sight: for he is at my right hand, that I be not moved" (Ps. 15:8).

This book will not be a close examination of Catholic Church history, our age of the modernist heresy's Vatican II, nor of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr. It will, rather, be a simple following through this world hegemony of Fr. James Wathen, traditional priest, and a study of his life’s work among a traditional apostolate.

This study will include how Father's later priestly routine in the years since departing his Owensboro diocese, was typical in many ways to that of most other traditional priests. And yet his contained much that was unique. Upon his diocesan departure, he soon joined the ranks of Fr. Gommar DePauw, Mr. Patrick Omlor and Father (later, Abbe) George de Nantes as early voices and writers raised in opposition to Vatican II and its consequences.   He followed in the steps of Pope Pius X, the "Foe of Modernism," and joined the company of Fr. Denis Fahey and Fr. Leonard Feeney – who warned well before the Council about the liberal developments they were viewing in the Church and on Her horizon. As time went on these names were publicly swelled by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop Antonio de Castro Meyer – eventually Bishop Salvadore Lazo – as well as priests such as Fr. Lawrence Brey, Fr. Francis Fenton, Fr. Francis LeBlanc, Fr. Leo McNamara and Fr. Fred Nelson among others, all of whom became better known as the fight crystallized and was more fully understood. Through the years, Kentucky traditionalists Fr. Francis Hannifin and Fr. Urban Snyder occasionally offered Sunday Mass at Fr. Wathen’s Louisville chapel4 when he himself could not – as did his Ohio associate from the Dominicans, Fr. John J. O'Connor. Later, Father was also joined by Fr. Gavin Bitzer, who currently remains in Louisville at Our Lady of the Pillar Chapel. But at this time and in the early stages, there still was much with which Fr. Wathen had to contend alone. This was when his "traveling apostolate" began in earnest, and the Tribute section to follow tells that story best.

     Besides preaching Christ's doctrine, the primary purpose of the priest is to offer the Holy Mass and to forgive sins. The sacraments of the Holy Eucharist and of Penance depend solely upon him. But in this Church crisis, the need would involve more than covering just these particular sacerdotal duties. As developments continued, Father realized the attack against the Church was not on the Mass and dogma fronts only, but also the Sacrament of Holy Orders. The changes in this sacrament brought into question if "modern" or "new" priests, ordained under the "new rite" of Holy Orders, were really ordained at all. The sacrilegious fallout from that probability was and is almost inconceivable. In addition, the liberalization of grounds for annulment would lend utmost confusion to the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. All this, and more, caused such violence in Catholic procedure and culture that the like had never before been known. And into this fray stepped Fr. Wathen. Or rather, he stayed where he was in true faith and practice, while the twin cyclones of heresy and sacrilege swirled around a now-confused Catholic world. Given the completeness of Father as an alter Christus teaching, preaching, remonstrating, advising, offering Holy Mass, forgiving sins and performing all

various other priestly duties – in addition to his additional uncommon gifts of writing, radio journalism, and scholarly mastery of socio-political problems – he found it his obligation to address these subjects both as a Catholic priest and as an American patriot. Even though he devoted almost fifty years of a sacerdotal life to the immediate requirements of pastoral duties, he still managed to produce a body of literary and journalistic work

that is prodigious.

________________________________

4 This property has since been sold and some buildings demolished, including the structure which housed the chapel.

The Great Sacrilege

With little doubt the most important single accomplishment of Fr. James Wathen was his writing of The Great Sacrilege. Of course, Father’s years of direct pastoral labors deeply affected thousands. But The Great Sacrilege was the definitive, scholarly analysis and critique of the abominable fraudulent Novus Ordo “Mass,” and something he knew needed to be written as soon as possible. It eliminated overwhelmingly any confusion true Catholics may have had about the development of the “New Mass.” It was an absolute God-send. It showed not only the profound erudition and knowledge of a great scholar, but more importantly the deep spiritual understanding of a dedicated, Christ-like priest writing from the depths of his heart and soul.

Furthermore, this monumental work unmistakably proved to many, that the chief agents of the false Vatican II "reform” or revolution was the Zionist-Marxist-Masonic syndicate. It also proved that the Popes especially after Pius XII were at least careless, if not complicit. The Great Sacrilege adequately addressed the most serious problems generated by the Novus Ordo “Mass” of Pope Paul VI. It eliminated doubt where it needed elimination in the minds of sincere Catholics. It almost seemed the Holy Ghost’s necessary twentieth century addendum to both the sixteenth century Council of Trent and Pope St. Pius V’s Quo Primum. 5

The appropriateness of The Great Sacrilege derives from its precise timeliness and its fitness. The book appeared not ten years, not five years, but in 1971 – only three years after the “New Mass” appeared. To use a crude analogy, it was as if the player in the first round of the game drew the trump card out of his sleeve and took the pot. The Holy Ghost was that player. Yet there was nothing mysterious about the process of the generation of this writing. Its promptness was possible only due to the spiritual and intellectual condition of Fr. Wathen, who knew at first reading of the “New Mass” that it was fraudulent, synthetic, demeaning, even totally destructive to the priestly office. He was looking at a corpse, a cadaver, a Frankenstein monster. Here was a man of God whose journey to the holy altar of the priesthood began when only a young altar boy. As Father later put it: “For this I was born.” From his youth he was a person of prayer, and later a seminarian of intensive study. He was ever devoted to becoming one with the history and Magisterium of his beloved Church. Any talk of change or liberalization was an intrusion into the commitment he had made to the priesthood of his “Christ Crucified.”

Being an alter Christus, when offering almost daily the divine, magnificent Sacrifice of the Mass, he was one with each prayer and one with Christ. This, the “Great High Priest” gave him before He died, and it

was his again by divine delegation at each Consecration of each Mass. Why would any true priest knowingly let

anyone take this away from him? Fr. Wathen recognized the destruction of the Mass and the priesthood by

one diabolical instrument: the Novus Ordo Missae. It is well-known that about six international Protestant

ministers helped concoct the “New Mass” with the supervision of the Masonic Archbishop Annibale Bugnini.

________________________________

5 Quo Primum – The Apostolic Constitution of July 14, 1570, in the form of a Papal Bull, through which Pope St. Pius V introduced and imposed the Roman Missal (Missale Romanum) in the Roman or western rite of the Catholic Church. It is sometimes called the Latin or Tridentine Mass after the Council of Trent and its Commission concerning the Mass – of which this Apostolic Constitution and its Missal, now purged of “medieval secretions” and establishing a single ceremonial, were the result. Quo Primum made obligatory the prayers and rubrics for offering Holy Mass as contained in this Missal, and forbade any further changes by anyone "in perpetuity." The resulting altar missals thereafter had a copy of this Bull printed in front. The revolution of Vatican II made a point to viciously remove, if not destroy, all such missals.

The Novus Ordo is also astonishingly similar to the Cranmer Mass of Protestant England (though worse in its

effects). There is an ironical note in that the Cranmer Mass is one of the chief reasons the Catholic Wathens

left England for America in the seventeenth century, first living in Maryland then later re-establishing in Kentucky. It was therefore fitting that a Wathen, with the help of the Holy Ghost, later struck back, putting the abominable “New Mass” in its place by proving it to be only an "adoration of Baal."

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is of such import to the Catholic mind, devout or otherwise, that some will go to any "Mass" – whether Tridentine, Novus Ordo or, now, the Indult or “Motu Mass” – simply because it is labeled “Mass,” and with no carefulness whatever about whether this Mass be the acceptable, “real” One or not. The significance of The Great Sacrilege, therefore, cannot be overstated. It effectively addressed one of the great crises in the history of the Church by eliminating doubt and confusion in the minds of thousands of true Catholics. This surely saved many souls by their adherence to the Tridentine Mass and the infinite graces thereby generated for both them and the needy world. This spiritual ramification cannot be measured. To this day there are still new people discovering The Great Sacrilege. And the oft-heard conclusion continues anew: "If what Fr. Wathen says here is true, then the ‘New Mass’ really is a sacrilege." A further significance of The Great Sacrilege is that it manifests Father’s scholastic ability, training in the Faith and moral fortitude, in that he boldly proclaims Paul VI did not and could not have the authority to abrogate our Tridentine Mass: It was unchangeable and immoveable by the ancient law of Quo Primum. Several members of Fr. Wathen's apostolate will later relate that their first knowledge of him was through The Great Sacrilege. This often was followed-up by contact with Father personally. And the frequent result of that was arrangements being made for the Mass and sacraments to be provided at the very hands of the author himself! The traditional Catholic word-of-mouth grapevine did much of the rest in expanding his reach and influence, which the Tribute section to come will explain. As Father put it in The Great Sacrilege, faithful priests and faithful people have to find each other.

            Fr. Wathen once explained about the effect of such a book, saying, "It sits there and burns – like a coal." It was in The Great Sacrilege primarily where he first clearly affirmed that it was a mortal sin to attend the “New Mass” – a position for which he is perhaps most famous and infamous. The development of the Novus Ordo Missae required that this alien "thing" be theologically examined and classified. Being illegal and sacrilegious it had to be condemned and Fr. Wathen was among the earliest to do so. Father warned and asserted unfailingly ever after, that no one should attend the “New Mass” for any reason or circuмstance under pain of mortal sin; he sometimes used the alternate phrase “under pain of serious sin.” Those who humbly and with good will examined his condemnation on their own, using both investigation and prayer, came to the same conclusion. Surely Fr. Wathen saved many souls with this courageous and charitable warning – a duty many traditional priests have a real aversion to facing.

Indeed, loyal Catholics never questioned Fr. Wathen's stand on the Mass by saying something akin to, "Well this is an odd priest … he’s all alone in making these conclusions!" Rather, they would state, "Where are all the other priests? What's wrong with them?!" Father made sense. His assessment is appropriate and theologically correct. Again, as he put it in The Great Sacrilege, the Mass is so holy that to protect It, we should as it were, "throw our bodies over It." And that is the true Catholic spirit.

Who Shall Ascend?

Fr. Wathen’s other monumental book, Who Shall Ascend?, was born more of his comprehensive

knowledge of the Catholic Church and his vast and true knowledge of the world's socio-political condition. It is a summary of the major doctrines of the Catholic Church. It is also an evaluation of Vatican II, and conclusively established that event as both a political and religious revolution.

Who Shall Ascend? 6 also stands alone in the twentieth century, that time when it was written and published. Its entire subtitle is, The Catholic Faith and The Conciliar Church: A Meditative Study. For Father to call Who Shall Ascend? “a meditative study" implies a number of pertinent conditions. It was copyrighted in 1992, nearly thirty years after Vatican II. Fr. Wathen had already been a priest for seven years before the end of Vatican II and for another twenty-seven years after it, by the time he finished Who Shall Ascend?. Accordingly, having been an active Catholic priest intensely working in the trenches so to speak – saying daily Mass, hearing confessions, administering sacraments, dispensing practical doctrinal counseling in conjunction with a proven capable scholarship – he was able to more effectively write of the most misunderstood, even abused, doctrines and/or errors of the current Church. This he did with an obviously greater authority than most known lay journalists who were comparative neophytes in the struggle, and who also had not the indispensible perspective and graces that only a priest could possess. Father placed the major erroneous political philosophies in their correct perspective. For example, it was the false and naïve understanding of Communism that, to a very great degree, caused so many priests and lay people to apostatize to the Novus Ordo.

Fr. Wathen, with saving souls a prime objective, taught only orthodox doctrine, and that in the spirit of

his Divine Master and following His instruction, “But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil” (Mt. 5:37). And, it might be added, "He that is not with Me, is against Me: and he that gathereth not with Me scattereth” (Mt. 12:30). True Catholics know Christ did not bring forth a Church for popular appeal or automatic membership. He solemnly declared that many are called but few chosen: “How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!” (Mt. 7:14). Christ made salvation available to all, but not all will accept it as we see from both history and the Church's present situation. Having been an active dedicated traditional Catholic priest for over thirty years, spending hours, days, and many nights both living and meditating this treatise and the war it describes, Fr. Wathen knew this book had to be an unequivocal statement of the major doctrines of the sacred Magisterium of the Catholic Church, which, after decades of Vatican II, had become unrecognizable by most Catholics. In the spirit of the unmistakable, absolute declarations of Christ, the Son of God, Whose teachings were the same and had to be accepted with undeniable certitude, Fr. Wathen knew that nothing would be gained in these revolutionary times by proclaiming anything less than an unadulterated orthodoxy, to be accepted totally and without equivocation. In this lies the great value of Who Shall Ascend?.

            This work also needed to declare the age-old, well-established, Catholic doctrine of No Salvation

Outside the Catholic Church (Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus). Many foolishly thought such doctrine was well on its way to being destroyed – which was the very purpose of the "Ecuмenical Movement." The enemy had

________________________________

6Touching the subjects of Extra Ecclesiam or of Baptism in WSA, it later emerged that some authors Fr. Wathen thought orthodox and trusted enough to quote, were sometimes found in betrayal by having placed an opposite opinion elsewhere in their writing, thus appearing to hold contradictory positions. Also, due to Father’s workload, the typeset proofing and correcting of WSA had to be handled, not well as it turned out, by others. A 2-volume reprinting with corrections and minimal updates is now available.

meticulously planned this war for centuries, unbeknownst to most living participants but well-noted by those

like the watchful Fr. Wathen. Of course the dissolution of the Church can never happen: “Heaven and earth

shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away” (Mt. 24:35) – and “Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I

will build My church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Mt. 16:18). Though the effort of destruction would nevertheless be unceasing by Christ's enemies, it was resisted through the centuries, as well as now, by such as this seasoned warrior-priest and despite the uncommon and even extraordinary environment of combat in which traditional priests find themselves laboring in our times.

Rome’s casual, almost flippant treatment of the Fatima message from the Mother of God should have warned of a strange, alien power in the Vatican – restrained, unseen – but present in a face defiantly ignoring her Fatima directives. Moreover, Rome’s kid glove treatment of the evils of Communism as the twentieth century pushed forward, should have raised the same warning. Another signal which should have been read was the practical abandonment of the doctrine of the Dogma of Faith by Rome in response to Father Leonard Feeney, who all but threw this dogma into the Pope’s lap seeking and expecting corroboration. He received no supporting response, though as recently as twenty years earlier Pope Pius XI had declared:

                     The Catholic Church alone is keeping the true worship. This is the font of truth…

                     This is the temple of God; if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it,

                     he is stranger to the hope of life and salvation. (Mortalium Animos - 1928)

Rome’s treatment of Fr. Feeney’s appeal should have raised a red flag world-wide. But the world-wide media handled this event in its now typical fashion. Fr. Feeney was termed a radical heretic, even a “renegade”; he was censored and dismissed from the Jesuit Order. St. Benedict Center, under Fr. Feeney’s directorship, was condemned. And yet previously, Fr. Feeney had been termed by his Jesuit superior to be "the pre-eminent Jesuit theologian in America, bar none"! The less-esteemed, less-famous Fr. Wathen could not expect better results. (Incredibly shameful as well, was Rome’s earlier betrayal of the Mexican Martyrs and “Cristeros” of the 1920 Masonic revolution in that country – setting a sad pattern for the years to follow.)

With all of this history known to Father, and taking nearly twenty-five years to write, Who Shall Ascend? is a “meditative study” indeed, becoming perhaps one of the great Catholic books of the twentieth century. Important are its conclusions and messages. The first part is well-docuмented by the Council of Trent and two thousand years of Catholic teaching. The last part is well-docuмented by the historical events of the twentieth century. As with The Great Sacrilege, again Fr. Wathen threw down the gauntlet in Who Shall Ascend?.

Radio Program

The decade of the 1990s was one of some vindication. Many of Father's predicted developments found in both Who Shall Ascend? and his sermons regarding the Revolution's agenda, were indeed realized. These were not only the enemy's never-ceasing propaganda and never-ceasing changes in response to "the spirit of the Council," but also in its 1992 publication the New Catechism of the Catholic Church. Of course it was a doleful vindication. This publication coincided with the time when, depending upon the grace of the Holy Ghost and thanks to unusual support by a devoted apostolate, Fr. Wathen created one of his greatest achievements – his radio programs. These were jewels of journalism broadcast from stations located in Baltimore, Boston, Louisville, and Tampa, and throughout their networks. These essays were recorded, then delivered via tape for broadcast. With his usual clarity of thought and erudition, and using the Old and New Testaments as frequent foundational sources, Father analyzed major theological and scientific misconceptions: Atheism, heliocentrism, evolution, papal infallibility, sin, evil, basic Thomastic philosophy and theology, the Bishop Lazo letter, the Big Bang theory and even ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity. A great part of these radio essays were used to expose, define, and castigate the New Catechism of the Catholic Church and its total anti-Catholic substance. Fr. Wathen demonstrated conclusively the benign complicity of the bishops and hierarchy in this anti-Catholic monstrosity, none of whom raised a single word against this methodical declaration of a totally New Religion, if religion it can be called. Father also responded to the issues attacking his beloved country, addressing the U.N. and its world-wide tyranny, the alien control of the United States, plus Communism and its ever increasing control. In spite of the other demands on his time, Fr. Wathen alone researched, composed, and flawlessly recited these jewels of journalism for nearly a year without penalizing his pastoral duties.

Robert Welch, the renowned anti-Communist and later Catholic convert, once exclaimed, “Never in the history of civilization have there been so many falsehoods accepted world-wide by so many.” As with his other literary works, Fr. Wathen's radio essays were a triumph of bringing to life true doctrine and its application to the modern world.

Another event around this time and a most welcome one to Father, was the forthcoming of Bishop Salvadore Lazo’s letter in May of 1998 to Pope John Paul II. This declaration by a well-informed, conscientious Bishop returning to the traditional fold was a long-awaited and prayed-for event. Bishop Lazo, since deceased, was from the Philippines and was of course joyfully received. For thirty years Fr. Wathen had hoped for the awakening and return of many (or any) of the more than 2,500 bishops in the world. Encouraged by this lone hierarchical prodigal, Father devoted appreciative radio time to Bishop Lazo's defection back to the side of the True Church. If only other Bishops had likewise risen to their responsibilities in a more timely manner, what a difference that would have made! And, though late, it still could do so.

Traditional Catholics know what happened since the Second Vatican Council. We can imagine that these post-Vatican II years are very similar to the age of the early Church in fulfilling with amazing exactitude Christ words: “I am the vine: you are the branches: he that abideth in Me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit” (Jn. 15:5). In spite of almost impossible odds, the faithful Catholic remnant under Fr. James Wathen and priests such as he, survives and prospers only because of their efforts to live faithfully in Christ. The history of the Church after the Apostolic Age demonstrates that there were many heretical crises through the centuries. In each of them, Christ made certain to provide a great doctor or bishop in defense – such as Saints Athanasius, Irenaeus, Peter Canisius, or Robert Bellarmine. History tells us of these great guiding lights, but only to remind us of their instrumentality. They were special tools in the hands of the Divine Carpenter. Our assignment, as surviving beneficiaries of their loving labors, is to keep the Faith as well in our own age of upheaval. We can be assured that their continued wish and prayer is that we, like them, always live conforming to the words of Christ, “Without Me, you can do nothing” (Jn. 15:6).

In imitation of them, what follows is the account of one especially chosen Catholic priest of our time whose own story, in a sense, is still unfolding.

Merry · « **Reply #3 on:** October 28, 2019, 10:12:27 AM »

This part is from Fr. Wathen's older brother, John Wathen.

The Seminary

John remembers St. Charles Seminary in Baltimore which he and Fr. Wathen attended

        Although the following events took place a good seventy years ago, this writer still feels adequate for the job of relating them, as I also spent three years in that seminary having entered just before Fr. Wathen. Additionally, in the second year I had the "regulator" job with another second-year seminarian. This meant having the very same general schedule for three years. In the first two years the schedule was practically identical, thus 2 nine-month or 270 day sessions, a total of 540 days (plus the added responsibility of ringing the daytime activity bells!). A deep impression of this part of our lives, therefore, vividly remains with me.

        The "lighted hair" incident with Fr. Wathen happened in December of 1945. I left after the eighth grade to enter high school in September of 1946 at St. Charles Borromeo College and Seminary in Baltimore, Maryland. Father followed in 1947. St. Charles was under the direction of the highly regarded Sulpician Fathers of the Society of St. Sulpice. These fathers strenuously continued the Reformed system put in place by one of the most renowned and holy Cardinals of the sixteenth century and prime movers of the Council of Trent, St. Charles Borromeo, who also was very instrumental in the election of Pope St. Pius V.

        St. Charles was well known for its orthodoxy, intensive scholarship, and strict discipline. This may explain its alumni list of numerous illustrious prelates of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Nor is it unreasonable to recognize here the Holy Ghost forming a resistance plan to counter the Vatican II and New Mass debacle, with the entrance of James Wathen.

        Amazingly, I remember very little about my third year on the Senior side. I recall only a few isolated details, such as my study hall location in the large senior study hall and also a few times being in the handball court. But no sports activity is otherwise remembered – nor even on which floor I slept in the dorm building.

        But the location, site and building layout is still warmly remembered. St. Charles was located in Catonsville, a still semi-rural community in 1946 on the southwest edge of Baltimore, Maryland. The access lane from the main road was about a half-mile long, gently inclined, had the unlikely name of

Maiden Choice Lane and entered onto the north end of the campus. All the buildings of St. Charles were situated on a level ridge. A thirty-acre, flat, creek bottom ran parallel and facing the ridge building site. Most of the baseball diamonds, soccer and football fields were visible from the entrance and parking lot near the chapel. The campus included an outdoor 100'x30' swimming pool used in the spring, especially for the swimming meet held at that time. There also was a half-mile cinder running track. Most of the junior sports activities were on these fields. Almost all the senior sports activities took place just beyond, except for a couple of tennis courts and handball courts. The entry road continued past the parking lot to service the dining kitchen, laundry and storage buildings behind the chapel and main building. The chapel was the first building next to the entry parking location with its three front doors faced west. Connecting to its south side was a glass-enclosed corridor, which led to the three-story main building of matching stone. This corridor eventually became a hallway through the building connecting to a shorter corridor which ended in the four-story dormitory building. The main chapel contained a smaller chapel below which was the daily junior chapel. This also was connected by a similar basement corridor – a lengthy stretch used twice a day in silence by the juniors, from the chapel to the fourth floor dorm and back for daily Mass and night prayers. (One can understand how such repetition for 540 days, could almost guarantee that it would never be forgotten!)

        The main three-story building contained the president's office, almost all the classrooms, the junior study hall, and most of the priest–confessor residents. The middle, main front entrance opened to a wide hallway which went directly to the middle of the spacious dining hall, located in the back parallel to the main building. The dining hall accommodated possibly 350 students and priests. The priests were also the teaching staff.

        The estimated total number of students at St. Charles in 1946-1948 was about 350. This total was divided into juniors and seniors.

        The full junior study hall begins the count in which there were about eighty-five to ninety freshmen and thirty-five to forty sophomore high schoolers – thus about 125 "juniors." Seniors totaled about 225. These numbers diminished especially after high school, thus showing the trial nature of seminary life.

        The kitchen was accessed by several joining middle doors opposite the entrance and through which upper classmen served the priests and students. The priests ate at two long tables, one on each end and across the dining hall. All students and priests ate at the same time with over forty tables in use. Each table was covered with a clean white cloth and the silverware was of an attractive, durable quality.

Life at the Seminary

Weekday Schedule

Rising 6:00 a.m. – Make bed, personal care, dress

Mass 6:30 a.m.

Breakfast 7:00–7:40

Monday – Wednesday – Friday schedule

4 Classes 8:00 – 11:50 a.m. (all classes 50 minutes)

Noon meal 12:00 – 12:40 p.m.

3 afternoon Classes 1:00 – 4:00 p.m. (All classes 50 minutes)

Free time 4:00 – 5:45 p.m.

Evening meal 6:00 – 6:40 p.m.

Private rosary outside, weather permitting 7:10 p.m. – also beginning of Great Silence

Study hall 7:30 – 9:00 p.m.

Night prayers 9:10 – 9:30 p.m.

Silent Return to 4th floor dorm

Lights out 10:00 p.m.

Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday schedule

Same as above except no afternoon classes

Free time 12:40 – 5:45 p.m.

Saturday at 4:00 p.m. was Gregorian Chant practice. Also, confessions were during study hall on Saturday night.

Sunday followed the same early morning schedule, with High Mass at 9:00 a.m. and Vespers at 4:00 p.m.

        The regulator was to ring most of the daytime activity bells such as classes, meals, rosary and study hall and/or great silence. He did so with a key at a box located on the junior side at the juncture of the chapel corridor and main building on the first floor.

        Every student was encouraged to be involved in outdoor activity. This prompting was not necessary for most were normal and robust high school boys. Some of these were star quality football, track or baseball candidates. The weather also was conducive to this, as Baltimore has a temperate climate well situated in the mid-Atlantic region and further tempered by Chesapeake Bay.

        The freshman class was divided into four teams of fifteen to twenty for competition's sake. Games were scheduled for fall – soccer and football – and baseball for spring. On game day there were usually three or four other teams of choose-up football or soccer going at the same time. There was ample room for them. The football was touch football, a blend of running "light blocking" and passing. We speak of the "light blocking" Jimmy, who insisted on playing at that time, even though quite small. With his ever-present sensible logic he emphatically explained that at least he "could get in the way" as well as anyone else, which indicated his patient acceptance of his size.

        In the spring there were the three-day "May games" dedicated mostly to track competition. Our freshmen and sophomore classes had a couple of super 100-yard dash men, besides a handful of good ones, and some 220 or 440-yard distance men who showed actual star promise.

        Some of the seminarians from that time are still remembered for various reasons of prominence. Jim Schaeffer, from Toledo, Ohio, was probably the brainiest of our class out of several who were highly intelligent. Duane Connelly was a lanky first baseman who could well have played in the majors had he pursued it. Dick Awalt was an average size boy who could play any position in the infield well enough to make a college team. He was the best quarterback on the junior side. John Kavanaugh was a short, stocky boy who was a great catcher and tough – beguiling his appearance. John Falcone could have played offensive end on any college football team. He could catch a pass no matter where it was. John was the co-regulator with me in our sophomore year. He and I were on the same Indian team. From New Jersey a sophomore, Dominic Maide, was the best 100-yard man I've ever known. His form was perfect – powerful legs, leaning forward. Even though only a sophomore without training he did the 100 in less than ten seconds. There was also Joe Pheifenberger, another very fast 100-yard man. Dominic Maide did not return for his 3rd year, nor did Pheifenberger.

        In our freshmen class there were but very few non-sport students. They were those who almost had to be ordered to get outside. There also were some who did not even bring play clothes from home. Father White, the junior rector, had to go and buy them appropriate athletic clothes. It seemed that each student shared a locker with one more student. The locker room was adjoining the shower room with the additional lockers lined along the corridor. There was also a shower room for the juniors on the fourth floor next to the dorm and lavatory, but it could be used only morning or night.

        Regarding the long trek after night prayers from the chapel to the fourth floor dormitory, usually one or two of the priests who said night prayers with us or who were the dorm rectors accompanying us during this "silent march," would report to Fr. White when the odor in the locker shower room area got too rank. This priest made a few fitting remarks about calling our moms concerning washing our "slop" (play) clothes. As "mom" was no longer around, our “slop” clothes never were washed. They of course developed an offensive odor which would float upstairs then down toward the junior chapel.

        Each student was assigned a laundry number. This was sent to the freshman students in the summer to be sewn onto each article of clothing before departure from home. The dirty laundry was turned in to the laundry each week and returned the next week neatly folded, wrapped in a brown paper bundle all nice and fresh-smelling by the angelic nuns. So there was no reason for smelly "slop" clothes – just unconscious laziness and the absence of mom. In this, boys don't change much even in the seminary.

        Another little item: Directly across the same corridor and door of the shower room was the famous "Tony's Barber Shop." On free afternoons at Tony's Emporium, a student for 25 cents could get a haircut in one to one and a half minutes and with that, at no extra cost, priceless ridicule by Tony about one's looks, hair or clothes. He would find something peculiar about each of us. Tony was a not so much offensive as very witty – a wonderful Catholic man and most enjoyable. Short, dark, jovial, with a girth of obvious pasta origin, to us young students he wonderfully typified an Italian.

        If one were to characterize the kind of boys who were freshmen in my class, the conclusion would be that there was little difference between these normal, young, freshman high school boys and those of other schools. The intelligence level seemed to be somewhat higher, and certainly there was a gentlemanly refinement and intensity. Their language was not crude or risqué. And surprisingly, although being seminarians, there was no obvious show of expected piety or any level of pious affectation. They appeared to be just plain and simple young males going about the business of being students. Of the eighty-five or so boys in the freshman class, there were some who did not return the following year. One could not help wondering how their lives turned out.

        Besides class work and professors, the topic of free-time conversation was usually sports according to the season: Major league or college baseball, basketball or football. Conversation about the gender feminine was seldom entered into. There can be many explanations for this, and one may wonder since such a subject is usually part of an adolescent's preoccupation. But the obvious explanation here was how the seminary contained Catholic boys serious enough about their Faith to consider becoming priests.   Such a vocation would be a total commitment of a young man. It therefore was not surprising to find the practice and cultivation of purity, even in conversation, befitting the possible choice of this direction in life. Such candidates will get the graces to successfully work at it through prayer and concentrated effort. Daily Mass, the Eucharist and a busy schedule were certainly a major help, as well as the grace to finally know for sure that the priestly vocation was definitely yours.

        The freshman class came from Maryland, mostly Baltimore, but also New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Washington D.C., West Virginia, Virginia, Boston, Ohio, Florida and New York. This writer and his brother Jimmy were anomalies from Kentucky and got a lot of backwoods, hillbilly ridicule which we enjoyed, and to which we responded appropriately. The Brothers Wathen convincingly informed their fellows that when visiting home, the last three miles to the house were on horseback with our baggage following, lugged by horse and wagon!

        The dress code was coat and tie for daily Mass and classes, and a dark suit with white shirt and conservative tie for Sundays.

        The food was ample, tasty and nutritionally balanced. A simple dessert such as peaches, pears, pineapple, cake or cookies was usual for lunch and supper. With little effort one could discern a motherly fondness behind what issued from the kitchen.   There were eight students per table. The usual mix on the junior end of dining hall was three or four juniors (first or second year high school), four or five seniors of third and fourth year high and at least one sixth year Rhetorician ("rhet") or Plebian ("pleb"), fifth year. The same kind of mix existed on the senior end of hall excluding any juniors.

        As would be expected, the conversation was lively with such a variety of age and origin present.

        During Lent and Advent lunch and evening meals were in silence. While eating, a short spiritual reading and a meal-to-meal continuation of a classic Catholic novel was read by an upper classman. The Imitation of Christ was an example of the former. Reading was from a rostrum and P.A. system located on the side of the hall. A bell signaled the before and after blessing. Silence was observed coming in and leaving.

        On rainy or severe weather days there were a couple of ping-pong tables and pool tables. These were located in the recreation room downstairs off the corridor between the chapel and junior shower room. These tables were always in use. Some players became quite skilled. The "pool sharks" were avoided when possible. It seems that Fr. Jim became a super ping-pong "professional" during his seminary years. There was an indoor basketball court often used in the fall and winter months or rainy days.

        For an afternoon snack there could be a gathering around a buddy's trunk for a few special treats from mom, sister, aunt or granny. This writer acquired a life-long craving for the now world-famous Lebanon Baloney from Lebanon, Pennsylvania. "Skip" (John) Loehle from Lebanon received one of these enormous rolls every few months. And his name suggests a bit of relevant trivia. John Loehle, Bob Voelkel and John Wathen enrolled as freshmen in the same year. Each of us was followed by a brother – Joe, Mick and Jimmy respectively the next year. Sometime during the following three years, five out of the six left St. Charles. Such was the severe diminution of the seminary population. (There also were three freshmen who had older brothers at St. Charles: Jim Schaeffer, Larry Feeley and Eugene Wesolowski.)

        Another choice source for snacking was at a small school supply and concession stand in the basement of the dorm building. We often bought ice cream and cookies or small cakes. If money was short, Jimmy was always a reliable source for a handout. He usually did not need anything himself but never turned his beggar-brother down. He was far from being miserly but was, if you will, rather thrifty. He was a natural money manager, simple in taste and of a Spartan temperament. However, he never reminded me when I owed him. I suppose I still owe him money among his other truly more priceless gifts. This same quiet generosity was another of the virtues which endeared him to so many.

        Finally, there were two Visitor Sundays each year: One between September and Christmas holiday and the other about March. The Baltimore and Maryland students usually had family visit them, as well as did the others from close-by locations such as Washington D.C., New Jersey, Delaware or Pennsylvania.

        St. Charles College was simply structured personnel-wise. There was the President, Fr. George Gleason; the Chief Sacristan and Master of Ceremony, Fr. Kuyler; Chief Infirmarian, Fr. George Whitford; Senior Prefect of Discipline, Fr. Joseph Earley; Junior Prefect of Discipline, Fr. Joseph White; Choir and Gregorian Chant Director, Fr. "Fritz" Hesler. The professors were all priests and most of them were also assigned confessors for each student, who had the option to change if desired. The relationships were generally formal in class but more casual with the priest-confessor role. As is common in such an environment, the personal idiosyncrasies of the professors are singled out with fitting nomenclatures (but not openly, of course). Fr. Eaton was very heavy-set and walked in a duck-like fashion. You guessed it – he was "Ducky" Eaton. Another English teacher, Fr. McCauley, was much shorter and even broader. He was "Buz" McCauley and spoke in class with a low, ever-constant monotone almost as if humming his message. Fr. John J. Tierney was a very colorful, round-faced, jovial priest with a strong baritone voice and ready humor and laugh. He never seemed to need his history text, having "lived" it many times – a great teacher. We all referred to him as "John J." Fr. Whitford, the Chief Infirmarian was "Big George." Fr. Chudinsky was "Chuddy." Fr. John Franey, a quiet, saintly priest, was "Jack" Franey. He taught Greek and was also Jimmy's confessor. There were a couple of older, retired priests: The very saintly Fr. Saupin from France and Fr. Klapechy, an ex-German submarine captain from World War I. In total, there were about thirty to thirty-five priests at St. Charles.

        The curriculum was similar to a high school prep school, but with greater emphasis on Latin and English:

4 years of English and/or Composition

4 years Latin

2 years Greek

2 years French or German

4 years History

1 year Geometry

1 year Geology

4 years Physical Science

4 years religion

Fifth and Sixth Years' Curriculum

        Many of the subjects of the last two years are not remembered except for Speech, Rhetoric and the allied subjects preparatory for Major Seminary studies, including Latin Reading and Composition.

        Such an extensive curriculum and demanding schedule for years might cause wonderment. But it should not. The priest is the bridge between the world of man and the spiritual reality of the Catholic Church – a "pontifex," an "alter Christus." Such a calling and responsibility must be tested unconditionally and its formation augmented by the broadest classical discipline possible. A priest is in the world but not of the world. This separation must become a habitual virtue to safeguard this necessary perspective. The integrity of such a schedule and discipline is personally, jealously guarded by Christ and the Holy Ghost in addition to the influence of daily Mass, sacraments and prayer. Each day as the learning advances, it must be assimilated in and on a foundation of Catholic faith which determines its acceptability or reasonableness. Furthermore, not the least reason for such a regimen is that it is necessary for the creation of an unconditionally obedient priestly candidate. On the day of his ordination, this priest is expected, by his bishop, to have a Gibraltar–like obedience, but one founded on the unchangeable truths of Catholicism.

        With all of the above being said, the good will and the deepest faith of the priestly candidate is yet most necessary and essential. Time has proved that Fr. Wathen's calling was not only of time and place but a uniquely spiritual one.

        We venture to say that Father was an exemplary product of this Trentine-Borromean system, in spite of the relentless siege of the world, the flesh, the devil, and the later modernistic liberalism of his generation. We may conclude in the case of the faith of this priest, that the successful consummation of these many years of priestly formation was but the tip of the iceberg – the main substance of which, was his absolute acceptance of the unexpurgated bundle of the wondrous gifts bequeathed to His Church by Christ "Crucified" for the sanctification of the world.

        This chronicle hopes further to show that in this, Fr. Wathen gloriously differed from most of the Catholic priests of his day, who had received the same formation and foundation but who, in the Great Crisis to come, were found wanting.

Stubborn · « **Reply #4 on:** October 28, 2019, 12:16:28 PM »

Quote from: CatholicInAmerica on October 26, 2019, 10:36:58 PM

Please share any story you know about priests who protested against the V2 changes during the 60s and refused to say the new mass, priests who left their pensions etc. very very interested in this topic of true Catholic priests who fought against modernism in their diocese. All trades know who lefebvre is but I’m trying to recognize the unknown priests. Also include what happened to them after they fought against the heresy.

Thanks

There were more then a few that passed through, unfortunately it seems like a lot of those courageous priests did not get out of it unscathed. Either they went back to the NO or lost it in some other way.

Here is an audio recording from a tape recording of Fr. Conrad Altenbach in 1974 before he became a sede. That's one of the things they did before computers - put sermons or talks on cassette tapes and mail them out to subscribers. I remember him being a strong minded priest who was way beyond totally disgusted with the changes. I met him in probably 1970 or so, but never really knew him. By the mid 1980s, we heard that he became a sede and died only a year or two after having been made a sede bishop.

You may be able to detect his Just Frustration in places in the recording.

Merry · « **Reply #5 on:** October 28, 2019, 12:38:44 PM »

Yes, Stubborn, Fr. Altenbach's "cassette's" are still run across from time to time!

Miseremini · « **Reply #6 on:** October 28, 2019, 01:24:19 PM »

Quote from: CatholicInAmerica on October 26, 2019, 10:36:58 PM

Please share any story you know about priests who protested against the V2 changes during the 60s and refused to say the new mass, priests who left their pensions etc. very very interested in this topic of true Catholic priests who fought against modernism in their diocese. All trades know who lefebvre is but I’m trying to recognize the unknown priests. Also include what happened to them after they fought against the heresy.

Thanks

Was looking forward to personal stories of priests who resisted Vat II.

SimpleMan · « **Reply #7 on:** October 29, 2019, 04:55:13 PM »

I don't have the full story on Father Leo Carley, but here is an old post from CathInfo:

https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/father-leo-carley-in-west-virginia/

I only met him once (1997), when he drove down once or twice a month to offer Mass in Cross Lanes WV (suburban Charleston). I was on a road trip in that area, and made it a point to drive out of my way to assist at his Mass and stay overnight at the Motel 6 (shake hands with a poor boy!) before I hit the road again. Very edifying. Fine, fine priest, very holy. They set up a portable chapel at the volunteer fire department. The story I heard was that Father Carley took one look at the new post-Vatican II vestments that they were going to make all the priests wear, he said "nothing doing", and walked out. The Mass at Cross Lanes has since been discontinued.

StLouisIX · « **Reply #8 on:** October 24, 2020, 08:43:43 PM »

Matthew · « **Reply #9 on:** October 25, 2020, 04:57:30 AM »

Quote from: Miseremini on October 28, 2019, 01:24:19 PM

Was looking forward to personal stories of priests who resisted Vat II.

Yes, I'm sure if any priests are unknown they're unknown for a reason -- they capitulated, compromised, and never became a hero like all the Trad pioneer heros of the 60's and 70's.
Everyone knows who Abp. Lefebvre is -- but all the bishops that compromised and failed to do their duty, and stand up for the Truth and Catholic dogma? They are dead and forgotten, including in God's Book of Life which is most important of all!

It's like I kept telling Fr. Pfeiffer from afar -- he's not going to discover some awesome Trad bishop under a rock. All the bishops willing to stand for Tradition are well-known and accounted for. There are no wonderful surprises waiting to spring on the world. Of course Fr. Pfeiffer dealt with this fact by having himself consecrated, but that's another story.

songbird · « **Reply #10 on:** October 25, 2020, 03:18:27 PM »

I appreciate who posted the schedule and the way of life of a seminarian. My great-great Uncle Fr. Rudolph Stoltz was of the Precious Blood Society, St. Charles Seminary in Carthagena Ohio. !907-1944. I know he did not live in the 60's, but I know in my heart, he would have said NO, to the new order.

I had to envision he way until now. Thank You. He was a dean, as well as pastor/missions on the Precious Blood. The people in the midwest loved their "Sons of Gaspar". St. Gaspar the founder and Sons were the priest. Michigan wrote of the Precious Blood Confraternity and their love for these priests.

I often wondered if he had left anything besides the letter I have of 1905. In this letter he states that at his Holy Eucharist he prayed for his vocation and he received a strong inclination to study for the priesthood. The letter was lost or forgotten and found in 2001 and was an answer to prayer, "why he wanted to become a priest?"

I do remember Fr. Francis LeBlanc, a very good confessor. Went to bed early and up early to hear confessions of men on their way to work at 6 am. He told me that he decided to be a priest when he saw how a priest was mistreating Our Lord. Fr. Leblanc told Our Lord, I can do better. Oh, just warms my heart and soul to have known such beautiful priest.

May we get many more replies to this post.

Merry · « **Reply #11 on:** October 25, 2020, 05:37:05 PM »

Songbird, the Precious Blood Fathers had a retreat center in Waltham, MA near where I used to live. It was a wonderful, serene piece of property, with a grotto to Our Lady of Lourdes and other outdoor statues, beautiful trees, and a gift shop. Of course it was Novus Ordo, with the chapel well-desecrated. But I often prayed it would stay in the possession of the Church in anticipation of better days.

Well, didn't the city go for it using eminent domain, as they coveted it for the location of a new high school. A deal was eventually struck with the Order's headquarters in Italy. So, another piece of Church property is lost.

I believe I read somewhere that their Founder, St. Gaspar del Bufalo, was called the "Hammer of Freemasons."

songbird · « **Reply #12 on:** October 25, 2020, 10:52:32 PM »

Thank you for sharing, Merry. St. Charles Seminary in Carthagena is destroyed as well. Only retired clergy remain. I had a tour given to me and my mother in 2000. I saw all the books and 10 years later, all the books were sold and went to Dayton Ohio used book store. I want to say Dayton, south of Carthagena.

In the Chapel, all side altars were removed and put in the basement. Priests had their masses there in 2000. Very sad! I could not convince my New order mom that things were so bad.

TKGS · « **Reply #13 on:** October 26, 2020, 04:18:08 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on October 25, 2020, 04:57:30 AM

Of course Fr. Pfeiffer dealt with this fact by having himself consecrated, but that's another story.

Do you now consider his consecration to be valid? Asking for a friend.

TKGS · « **Reply #14 on:** October 27, 2020, 04:37:21 PM »

Quote from: TKGS on October 26, 2020, 04:18:08 PM

Do you now consider his consecration to be valid? Asking for a friend.

Matthew, this is a serious question. Does anyone consider Fr. Phieffer's consecration to be valid other than himself and his cult-following?

Author Topic: Story’s of priests during the 60s (Read 2630 times)

CatholicInAmerica

Story’s of priests during the 60s

Merry

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

Merry

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

Merry

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

Stubborn

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

Merry

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

Miseremini

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

SimpleMan

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

StLouisIX

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

Matthew

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

songbird

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

Merry

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

songbird

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

TKGS

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s

TKGS

Re: Story’s of priests during the 60s