Dr Shaw (the LMS Chairman) wrote an article regarding the accuracy of the book AA-1025 (LMS Chairman: Communist infiltration: a comforting fantasy). Here is my response as it was posted on his blog:
Objection 1: On the flyleaf it reads ‘This book is a dramatized presentation of certain facts…’. Therefore it is a pure work of fiction.
Response to Objection 1: The flyleaf says ‘dramatized presentation of certain facts…’ the word “facts” is used. Literature fiction is subdivided into Realistic Fiction (untrue, but could actually happen), Non-realistic Fiction (could never happen), and Semi-Fiction (implementing a great deal of non-fiction). The use of the phrase “pure work of fiction”, seems to imply Non-realistic Fiction, while the statement given by the French Editor at the most is consistent with the definition of Semi-Fiction.
However, later in the book, in the Publisher’s Note About This Book (p. vii) it reads “According to the publisher at Editions Saint-Raphael, the story as she tells it is essentially true and the way it happened; however, she did apparently, do some slight editing of the text to make it more readable.”
This statement supports the definition of Non-fiction (a narrative, account, or other communicative work whose assertions and descriptions are believed by the author to be factual).
Objection 2: The way real Communists reacted to developments in the Catholic Church, prove that the Communist regime and agent as depicted in AA-1025 are false. Evidence: Catholic Church in Poland, and the Patriotic Catholic Church in China.
Response to Objection 2: Since the publisher gives fiat to author of AA-1025 in asserting that “the story as she tells it is essentially true and the way it happened”, and that the author is given the presumption of innocence (as justice deserves), then one must admit that there is in existence the original text of the agent. It is certain that not all Communist activities have been published, especially high level attempts at subversion or espionage. Subversion being named as the highest value and most politically sensitive operation in the 1986 RAND report on ‘Countering Covert Aggression’ by Stephen T. Hosmer & George K. Tanham.
Objection 3: The absence of any reference to sex-abuse as a method of subversion, proves that the book is falsified.
Response to Objection 3: Absence of any reference, is not substantial evidence for discrediting the book as a factual reference in this particular case of attempted subversion of the Catholic Church. The book accounts an attempt to infiltrate and subvert the highest levels of the organisation of the Catholic Church, use of sex-abuse at early stages of that mission, would potentially frustrate it’s end objective. The nature of Covert Aggression, is that it is highly compartmentalised, it is not normal for an operative to have a birds-eye view of Covert Operations.
“Venerable Brethren, you see clearly enough how sad and full of perils is the condition of Catholics in the regions of Europe which We have mentioned. Nor are things any better or circumstances calmer in America, where some regions are so hostile to Catholics that their governments seem to deny by their actions the Catholic faith they claim to profess. In fact, there, for the last few years, a ferocious war on the Church, its institutions and the rights of the Apostolic See has been raging…. Venerable Brothers, it is surprising that in our time such a great war is being waged against the Catholic Church. But anyone who knows the nature, desires and intentions of the sects, whether they be called masonic or bear another name, and compares them with the nature the systems and the vastness of the obstacles by which the Church has been assailed almost everywhere, cannot doubt that the present misfortune must mainly be imputed to the frauds and machinations of these sects. It is from them that the synagogue of Satan, which gathers its troops against the Church of Christ, takes its strength.” – Syllabus of Errors. The inclusion of the father of all lies, is obligatory, since it is ultimately from him that all error enters the world.
I have a great deal of admiration for Dr Shaw, but every so often I feel a little let down by his logic, he is a Professor of Philosophy at Oxford University after all!
As I see, using Occam’s Razor would lead one to believe that AA-1024 presents a true account, as is pointed out on page vii of the book.
Clearly, Dr Shaw’s conclusion is correct to a degree;
- There are external influences on the Church
- Catholics not being Catholic enough, adopting ideas incompatible with the Faith
- 19th Century Liberalism, early 20th Century Modernism, later 20th Century [neo] Liberalism.
But, I disagree with the final analysis:
In terms of the intellectual leadership of the Church, the revolution had already triumphed: it just needed to manifest itself. But we can’t blame the Reds for this. The rot came from within.
Surely enough, we can’t blame the Communists entirely for this. But they had a contributing factor, how much of a factor is yet to be decided. One very important fact that Dr Shaw forgot, was the agreement between the Catholic Church and the Communists prior to the Second Vatican Council, that Communism was not to be a topic at the Council. We know how much rot came out after the Council. Just how much of that can be attributed to the secret agreement? we may only ever find out in Heaven. So respectfully, Communist infiltration: a comforting fantasy? No, Communist infiltration, a disturbing fact.
Of course we can’t blame only the Communists, just as we also can’t only blame the Masons (though they most certainly were also a major contributing factor). So, Masonic infiltration: a comforting fantasy?! No, a very disturbing fact. Satanic infiltration: a comforting fantasy?!! Just as much as the great lie that he’s convinced the world he doesn’t exist. Whistling in the dark, is not going to change the very alarming truth that Satanic infiltration is a terrifying truth.
The statement that “The rot came from within”, is incorrect, for it supposes that a body can corrupt by itself. Nature teaches us that corruption always comes from without, it is something foreign to the body. The truth is that people within the body consented and cooperated with that foreign entity and thus were the manifestation of the symptoms of corruption.
The reality is, that the author of this corruption is Satan, working through his agents, conscious and unconscious, both within and without the Body of the Church Militant.
The rot started without, not within.
Please remember however, just because evil exists in the human members of the Church Militant, does not disprove the indefectability of the Church, nor any of her other Attributes. They can try as much as they wish, even corrupt the person who occupies the See of Peter, but ultimately, they will never prevail. Please see my article on Sedevacantism? Sedevacantists? No, not a great idea.
Articles related to my response, include:
CatholicScout Comments: Haldir Quote
CatholicScout Comments: Divide and Conquer
CatholicScout Comments: How to oppose the Dark Lord
Is Gospel Nonviolence communism? Q&As on Gospel Nonviolence 2