A new name to follow and a wonderful apostolate to support ...
Michael Matt, the prolific, calls-them-like-he-sees-them editor of the traditional newspaper
The Remnant, recently added Ms. Hilary White to his Masthead as his new Rome correspondent.
Mr. Matt graciously provided Rorate Caeli with a free reprint of the article that, near the end, mentions this blog.
For those of you not familiar with this wonderful fortnightly, it is a great time to subscribe, and the costs are relatively nominal. For the pennies a day it would cost to help this wonderful apostolate you will learn and grow in your faith tenfold.
Please consider subscribing by clicking HERE. And enjoy the full article below, gratis from
The Remnant.
And please remember to follow @RorateCaeli on Twitter where we have now gained over 200 followers.
Michael J. Matt: Thank you, Miss White, for agreeing to sit for this brief interview. I’m pleased to introduce you to Remnant readers as our new correspondent in Rome, though I’m sure many if not all are quite familiar with your fine body of work for LifeSiteNews. So, welcome, Miss White! How about we start with some personal background. You were born in Canada, I understand. What part of Canada?
Hilary White: Born and raised in Victoria, British Columbia, the most beautiful place in the world. Which can be a bit of a problem, since everywhere else you go tends to be a bit of a letdown. But I’ve lived in Vancouver, for 11 (long, dreary, rain-soaked) years, Halifax, Toronto and the NWT and spent part of my childhood in Manchester, England, where the family is from. Every so often, I wake up and can’t remember which continent I’m on.
MJM: Baptized Catholic?
HW: Of course, but not until my mother was received when I was five or six. This was the beginning of a tragic story, since she had the misfortune to living in Remi de Roo’s Victoria and it was the height of Silly Season there. In 1972, if you did what you were supposed to do and went up to the local parish asking to become Catholic, they put you into the hands of their lay, or worse, sister-led religious education team. I was too young to be “instructed” but I know that she came away having been told that reincarnation was a perfectly acceptable idea for Catholics. A little half-baked Buddhism, a little Jungian psychology, a Carl Rogers-style encounter session or two, and she was ready for Victoria’s Catholic scene. My poor mum never did manage to sort it all out, but went to her death living in the same fog of bewilderment these people instilled in her in the early days of the aftermath of the Vatican II Asteroid.
Somehow, I acquired a love of the Blessed Virgin, having been given a cheap plaster statue of her which I kept in my room on a little altar I made on my dresser. I brought her flowers and odd things I found on the beach. Maybe it was this that rescued me.
MJM: No doubt it was. And your family—still in Nova Scotia?
HW: The only family I have left are my mother’s adoptive brother and his family, in Cheshire. Long story. Has to do with the War, rationing, the Blitz, the invasion of Normandy, the post-colonial social mores of upper middle class Salisbury, the Raj and a US airman from Waco, Texas named Herbert Edward Burkett. Complex. Might make a good novel some day. In fact, now that I think of it, it already sounds like an Evelyn Waugh novel.
MJM: Where were you educated?
HW: At the Victoria public library, the library of the University of Victoria, the Vancouver
and Burnaby Public libraries, the library of the University of British Columbia, the libraries of the Classics and Philosophy Departments of Dalhousie University and Kings College in Halifax, the St. Michael’s College library in Toronto and the dining room table in the house of the late, great John Muggeridge. In between reading books, I attended classes now and then.
MJM: So, you’re a long way from home. What brought you to the Eternal City?
HW: A job. I had worked for the national pro-life lobby for some time before getting somewhat burned out, or perhaps ground down by the political thing. I started writing for LifeSiteNews.com when I realized that I could not face writing another brief for parliamentarians who didn’t know, or care, what we were saying. When my mother passed away, I suddenly felt I had had enough of Canada and went in search of the relatives I hadn’t seen since I was six. After a year in England, I came to Rome because, in essence, I was the only person on staff with a European passport who knew enough about the Catholic scene to ask the right questions.
MJM: And how is the mood in Rome these days? I’m sure the sex scandals continue to cast long shadows but from your vantage point are there any indicators of better days ahead?
HW: It depends on whose mood, particularly. There seems to be a sense of fin de siecle among the dinosaurs, the ones who staged and nurtured the Revolution since the 1950s. Among the younger crowd, those who are left, there is a sense of cautious optimism. A lot of hopes are being pinned on Pope Benedict, and his every move is being watched closely, not only by the scandal-hungry mainstream media.
Yes, it seems that the only thing anyone can talk about is the sex abuse scandals, and it is clear that history is being made. Taking the longest possible view, the Church is at last passing out of a phase that started in the 1950s, and with the sex abuse cases, is simply reaping what it has sewn. The result of effectively abandoning the traditional moral strictures in seminary formation is going to be moral chaos in the Church. Two and two still equal four. And now, even despite the attempts by the media to obscure this equation, many more people can see that, so much more clearly than before. The state of moral chaos, the doctrinal and liturgical disaster that is the Church in Belgium, Germany, Austria, France, Britain etc, is now being revealed for the evil that it has been all along. That this did not come about under John Paul II is an indication of Benedict’s new direction and strengths.
Again, taking the long view, I think this period will end up being a positive one for the Church. If the mainstream media has failed to make the connection between their favourite European bishops publicly opposing the Church on homosexuality and condoms and their protection of predatory homosexuals in the priesthood, the lesson is not being lost on those who see the situation with the eyes of the Faith. It will soon occur even to some MSM pundits that it has been the darlings of the “progressive” end of the Church, the poster-boys of the Revolution, who have been the most egregious culprits in covering up for their abusive priests and fellow bishops. The Weaklands, the Mahoneys, the Danneelses.
These scandals will, and indeed have already resulted in many becoming so distressed that they will leave the Church. But it seems obvious that those who have so attached themselves to the anti-Catholic Revolution that they would leave when it is shown to have been a hoax and a scandal, have in fact long since left the practice of the Catholic religion, if they ever had the Faith at all.
In the long term, Cardinal Ratzinger’s famous prediction of a smaller and more faithful Church will certainly come true, as it is demonstrably doing now in Austria, and this is certainly a loss. But I will dare to take Cardinal Ratzinger’s prediction one step further, and say that the new, smaller more faithful Church, will be all the more equipped to rescue their fallen-away fellow citizens, particularly after a period of state persecution.
Perhaps this looks in a worldly sense like a wan hope, but it is the real hope, the theological Hope, that God can bring a far greater good out of the darkness we are now experiencing. Pope Benedict clearly knows this, and he knows what he can and cannot achieve. His actions in the last two or three years, particularly with the outreach to the Anglicans, to the Orthodox and to the SSPX, have made it clear that he anticipates and hopes for this outcome. I have a friend here who likes to say that in five years, Benedict has done more for the true ecumenical cause, that of bringing all Christians back into the fold of Rome, than his predecessor did in nearly three decades. In this alone, Benedict has made extraordinary progress. But his actions have necessarily been preparatory. He is creating a situation in which the Church can begin to heal, a process that will take a long time, and will still be going on long after he is resting in St. Peter’s.
He also seems to know that he is limited in what he can achieve. He knows the Vatican machinery too well to think that he can, as so many of us have daydreamed, simply start firing people. A few heads have rolled, it is true, but although we tend to think of the pope as allpowerful in the temporal sense, we have seen, as in the diocese of Linz, that the “nuclear option” is not as easy to achieve as it might look on paper.
At the same time, Benedict, who knows in more detail than perhaps anyone else in Rome about the doings of these priests, is undertaking a clean-up operation. But he knows the size of the Aegean Stables. Is he willing to divert a whole river to clean it out? I don’t think we have yet seen everything Benedict plans.
We all knew the Revolution could not last. The lack of decisive action against it through the long period of the last pontificate has allowed it to grow complacent and comfortable, but we still knew that its dedication to a certain political ideology and its anti-Catholic shortcomings were going to bring it down eventually. The truth always wins. And the signs are growing, particularly in Europe, that a storm of persecution is brewing, which has always been good for the Church.
But remember that Benedict is of that generation that put all their eggs into the Vatican II basket and is determined to “make the council work”. This despite that 45 years after its close, they are still arguing over what its purpose was. Like nailing Jell-O to the wall. Younger Catholics, those of us that are left in the pews, simply cannot understand this obsession of the last generation with that monumental failure. But for the Ratzinger generation, “The Council” defined Catholicism, and it seems they cannot be convinced to give it a dignified burial.
But we cannot think that a single man, even the pope, even a great pope, could bring about huge sweeping changes for the better. As we have seen in the last few decades, it is a great deal easier to destroy the Church’s traditions with the sweep of a pen, than it will be to restore them. The Vatican is an old and peculiarly Italian institution and it is used to doing things the same way it always has, whether the ruling faction is “conservative” or “liberal”. It is a cliché, perhaps, but true, that the Church takes the centuries-long view, and what is hap-hap-happenin’ to the rest of us in the world is little more to the men Inside the Walls than a momentary distraction over one’s morning cappuccino.
MJM: What about the motu proprio? Has it influenced ecclesial politics in Rome long term?
HW: I would say that it is the personality of Benedict, the Ratzinger Effect, of which the
motu proprio is merely a manifestation, that is taking hold. You can see it in many little ways: cardinals who have spent their careers under JPII exalting feel-good doctrinal ‘ecumenism’ who have suddenly discovered their inner conservative; bishops who ten years ago would rather have gnawed off their own arms, are giving permission for the Mass (though of course, we all know that no permission is needed) and encouraging, or at least no longer obstructing, lay initiatives for Catholic things like Eucharistic adoration as well as anti-poverty groups. It is simply true that the Church, like most human institutions, works from its leadership down. Democracy is a fine theory, I suppose, but external reality is monarchical and hierarchical, and a leader is called that because of what he does. Benedict’s preferences for Bach and Mozart were well known even to those who had never read Spirit of the Liturgy, and when he was elected, the savvier among the world’s episcopal class understood that the tide was changing, and started making the appropriate attitudinal adjustments. At least in public.
I think a lot of people, who thought the Church really had changed at the Council, were surprised to see the explosion of Extraordinary Form Masses suddenly springing up around the world. If you look at Rorate Caeli every day, you get a sense that there really was a remnant, underground Church waiting in the catacombs for it to be safe to come out. Of course, it is early days yet, and anything could happen, including, God forbid, another conclave, but it does seem that the Revolution is seeing the last days of its hold on power.
There are some overt hold-outs of course, for the increasingly greying and wrinkling tie-dye and Birkenstock NewChurch cause. The English bishops, for the most part, are still sulking over the conclave. And if reports are to be trusted of the colossal bungling of preparations for
September’s Papal visit, seem not to have learned much about playing the game. The Austrians and Germans are busy on the secular side self-destructing by their mishandling of sex abuse allegations, and on the religious side, are alienating their supporters in the Vatican by publicly insulting the pope and long-time Roman power brokers like Angelo Sodano. The Italian Church is at least ten or even twenty years behind the curve, and the insipid banality of their liturgy is matched only by their easy-going attitude towards Catholic moral teaching. It is going to be an uphill struggle to restore some of what has been lost in Italy, but given the Italians’ 1.3 birth rate, the whole issue will be moot in another generation or two. It is not clear that the Revolution knows it is in trouble. Or how much trouble.
MJM: Do you have a sense of where the battle lines lie with respect to supporters and opponents of the Holy Father’s agenda?
HW: Benedict is swimming in a pool of sharks. They are aging sharks, but many of them still have most of their teeth. He is strongly supported in some important dicasteries, particularly CDF and Divine Worship and Sacraments. His Secretariat of State, (which means his press office as well) is in a state of chaos, with Sodano still pulling many of the strings. He is also opposed by a large portion of the Italian episcopate, but has chosen fairly well with Bagnasco as head. The war is still pretty hot Inside, which is what makes this an interesting posting. As to questionable appointments, a lot of people suspect that he suffers from Nice Guy Syndrome and has allowed his good nature to create a blind spot in judging character. There is also the formidable power bloc in there that transcends ideology and is simply an old boys network. It is not to be forgotten that the Vatican is run by Italians, and in the Italian culture you promote your friends and allies, no matter what sort of men they are. Still, everyone thought that Cardinal Levada was going to be a disaster as CDF, but he has turned out to be one of the pope’s most useful allies.
MJM: It seems that the canonization of Pope John Paul ‘The Great’ may have stalled in recent months. Any thoughts on why that should be?
HW: No one in this town has shouted “Santo subito” since Fr. Maciel was sent away to pray for forgiveness. I think the old Catholic saying is today as true as it has ever been: there’s no one so dead as a dead pope.
MJM: Can you tell us something about availability of the traditional Mass in Rome? In general, do you have the sense of a growing phenomenon, or is it still primarily underground?
HW: In Italy, the Church and the liturgy are frozen in perpetual winter, as if it will forever be 1976 and never Christmas. The progress made by the so-called traditionalist movement everywhere else, the slow creeping back of Gregorian chant, of polyphony, of some sense at least of decorum in ordinary N.O. parishes seems to have entirely missed the Italian Church. The average Italian knows little of his faith, and having that deep Italian sense of superiority and entitlement, cannot imagine that there is anything he needs to learn.
Most of the Italian episcopate, if any of them have even heard of the Motu Proprio, are secure in the knowledge that their flock certainly has not, and would never be interested in having their world shaken. As I said, the majority of those in the pews are either cotton-tops (though usually well-dyed) or thoroughly modern Millies who have no desire to return to a more traditional kind of religion. The sort of religion that will tell them to stop contracepting, for example. And in 20 or 30 years time, the big question is going to be not what sort of liturgy should we have, but what are we going to do with all these beautiful old buildings that no one goes to anymore.
MJM: In general, what sort of influence, if any, do traditional Catholics exercise in Rome?
HW: It depends on what you mean by “Rome”. There is a war over these issues going on in the Vatican, and the good guys seem to be making progress under the current regime. Indeed, throughout John Paul’s papacy, the FSSP were relegated to a tiny, out of the way chapel at the end of a grubby cul-de-sac, that seated no more than about 30 people at a squeeze. Shortly after Benedict’s papacy, however, they were given a magnificent historic Baroque church a fiveminute walk to a major transit hub in the centre of the centro. The parroco of Trinita was recently named among the ten most influential persons in Rome by Inside the Vatican. But all this being said, Trinita is still an island, surrounded by a sea of liturgical banality. And not as well-attended as we might hope. It’s early days yet.
MJM: I know you’ve done a lot of great work on family issues, i.e., culture and life—an area where the good guys seem to constantly be up against impossible odds. Are we winning any rounds in that sphere, anywhere in the world?
HW: Yes, in fact, we are, though it may not look like it. What is ultimately going to help us will be demography. What does not often get reported is that, although the news is nearly all bad at the legislative and judicial levels, on the ground, where it actually counts, the philosophy of
abortionism (if I may coin a term) is beginning to burn out. It is not widely known that in Italy, for example, 70 per cent of doctors will refuse to commit an abortion, and the public opposition to euthanasia was enormous during the Eluana Englaro fight, though she died.
The reason the EU and other places are putting in legislation attacking the conscience rights of healthcare workers, is that more and more healthcare workers are exercising them by refusing to have anything to do with abortion. Abortion in the US is getting harder to obtain at the state level, which is why, I imagine, the Obama administration is so keen to put abortion into a national system. In the UK, more doctors are refusing to do them, which is prompting the abortionists in the House of Commons and the medical regulatory agencies to push for more abortion training in medical schools, to weed out early those who might obstruct abortion as doctors. indication is the explosion of young people at the March(es) for Life.
In the last ten years, since I started in this field, the overall numbers of people attending these annual events in Washington and Ottawa has grown enormously. In 1999 when I first attended in Ottawa, I think he number was about 2000 and about 175,000 in Washington. Last year in Ottawa we had around 12,000 (don’t knock it! Canada’s a small country with a government-controlled press) and in Washington it was well over 300,000. At the same time the numbers have gone up, the percentage of young people attending has grown even more. Long gone are the days when the pro-life movement could be characterised as little old ladies with rosaries, and angry old white guys. Feminism, which is the foundation of abortionism, is very widely discredited among young women, a large percentage of whom were raised by single mothers and who have been able to see first hand what it has wrought.
Most of the best pro-life work around the world is being organised and led by people in their 20s and 30s. People who have survived abortion themselves, who have seen the damage being done not just by abortion, but by divorce, contraception, and the hyper-sexualised culture, are using the activist skills their parents used to tear down the culture, in order to build it back up. It is certainly an exciting time to be in this field.
In Europe the trend has caught on, and pro-life activities have stepped up. In the last two years, I believe we’ve had our first, and well attended Marches and demonstrations for life and family in places you’d never expect to see them. Places like Copenhagen and Brussels. Again, as with the Church, the tide is turning against the post-hippie dinosaurs, although, secure in their corner offices in Westminster and Brussels, they may not know it yet. What the end result will be remains to be seen. It’s why I’m glad I’m here doing this work. I get to watch it all from a front row seat.
MJM: From our side of the pond it seems that the European Union is hell bent on banishing all things Christian from the shores of Europe. First of all, would you say this is accurate? And, secondly, is there any serious, organized Christian opposition to the EU’s agenda in Europe ?
HW: The EU is an invention of the Revolution, and as such, it is built on something that is not real. It is a manifestation of the post-1960s Fantasy world that has rejected the Real for a set of ideological fantasies. It is a tissue of ideologically inspired lies, a soap bubble that will burst sooner or later. And given the current crisis of the Euro, it’s looking more like sooner. Whatever the EU is doing is going to fail, necessarily, because the Real will inevitably reassert itself. Unfortunately, “serious” Christianity in Europe is so small that it can do little, and “organised” or official Christianity, the Christianity with the funding, is largely in agreement with the EU’s goals. The Catholic bishops, for example, actually have an organisation that is part of the EU machinery. I think they make polite little peeps every now and then about abortion, but they are part of the machine.
But I think that people have a native instinct that the EU experiment will soon collapse under the weight of its own inconsistencies without a great deal of help. It is not, in fact, the EU that is the great threat to Christianity, it is merely a tool. One that will fail soon. Is failing in fact.
MJM: So, what’s the future look like for you? Is Rome home for now?
HW: I seem to be doomed to be a perpetual mendicant. At the moment, however, I can’t think of anywhere else it would be more worthwhile to be and I’ve just signed a 16-month lease on quite a decent apartment. As soon as I got here, though, it was as though I had finally made it to the top of the hill to get a look of the lie of the land, and immediately saw that there aren’t any taller places than this. Nowhere else gives as good a vantage point. This makes it as good a place as any to dig in and wait for the barbarians.
MJM: Ever get homesick?
HW: I live in a strange state of perpetual homesickness, without ever really knowing where, exactly, I am homesick for. Comes of having lived in too many places. Or maybe simply being a rootless post-modern. But I am not very well suited to this climate. At this point, July 26th, it has been roughly 35 degrees every day for two weeks, with no relief in sight, so I can say generally, that I am homesick for anything with a northern European, temperate zone climate.
MJM: Many thanks, Miss White, and I do hope this is the beginning of a long and fruitful alliance. Welcome aboard!
