Original Secret of LaSalette (1851) and Documentation From the Holy See Concerning the Condemnation of the 1878 Version
Original
Message of LaSalette, July 6, 1851
Discovered in the Vatican Archives
in 2009
Secret
given to me by the Blessed Virgin on the Mount of La Salette on September 19,
1846.
Secret,
Mélanie, I am going to tell you something you must not tell anyone:
The
time of God's wrath has arrived!
If,
after you have told the people what I told you just now, and what I will tell
you to say again, if, after that, they do not convert (if they do not do
penance, and if they do not stop working on Sundays, and if they continue to
blaspheme the Holy Name of God), in short, if the face of the earth does not
change, God will take revenge on the ungrateful people, enslaved by the devil.
My
Son will unleash his power! Paris, this city defiled by all kinds of crimes,
will inevitably perish. Marseille will be destroyed in a short time. When these
things happen, there will be complete disorder on earth. The world will abandon
itself to its impious passions.
The
Pope will be persecuted on all sides:
they will shoot at him, they will try to put him to death, but they will be
powerless; the Vicar of God will triumph once again.
Priests
and nuns, and the true servants of my Son, will be persecuted, and many will
die for the faith of Jesus Christ.
A
famine will reign at the same time.
After
all these things have happened, many people will recognize the hand of God upon
them, will convert, and will repent of their sins.
A
great king will ascend the throne and reign for a few years. Religion will
flourish again and spread throughout the earth, and fertility will be great.
The world, content with lacking nothing, will resume its disorder, abandon God,
and give itself over to its criminal passions.
Among
the ministers of God and the Brides of Jesus Christ, there will be some who
will give themselves over to disorder, and this will be the most terrible
thing.
Finally,
hell will reign on earth. It will be then that the Antichrist will be born of a
nun: but woe to her! Many people will believe in him, because he will claim to
have come from heaven; woe to those who believe him!
The
time is not far off; fifty years twice will pass [i.e., this will all happen, including
the coming of Antichrist, within 100 years, or by 1946].
My
child, you will not say what I have just told you. (You will not tell anyone,
you will not say if you must ever say it, you will not say what it concerns),
in short, you will say nothing more until I tell you to!
I
pray to Our Holy Father the Pope to give me his holy blessing.
Melanie
Mathieu, shepherdess of La Salette,
Grenoble,
July 6, 1851.
WYD+
That is the original message of LaSalette that Melanie sent to Pius IX, and it bears little if any resemblance to other longer version; the one that says “Rome will lose the faith and becoming the seat of Antichrist, and “the Church will be Eclipse,” which has been used by the Sedevacantists and others to bolster their position that the Catholic Church defected.
The 1878 version of the Secret
The long version did not appear until 1878, twenty-seven years after Melanie penned the original version that was sent to Pius IX. It appeared in a booklet titled, “The Apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary on the Mountain of La Salette on September 19, 1846,” with the imprimatur of Bishop Zola of Lecce. And it was immediately condemned.
1879 Version of he Secret Immediately Condemned by Rome
Rome reacted at once to the publication of the new version of the Secret. The Supreme Congregation of the Holy Roman Inquisition decreed that a letter be sent to Bishop Lece demanding an explanation for authorizing its publication and ordering him to withdraw the copies and prevent their distribution. The secret was subsequently condemned and placed on the Index.
Unfortunately, all efforts from Rome to forbid publication of the Secret were resisted. Indeed, the fervent dissemination of the new Secret was accompanied by disobedience and rebellion against Church authority.
Below are the relevant documents from
Rome, including a letter from Pope Pius X himself concerning Abbe Ernest Rigaud,
a less than stellar priest who, under
the pretext of promoting Our Lady of La Salette, “rebels against” his bishops “legitimate
authority, disregards” his “warnings and decrees, and shows no regard for
the suspension … impose upon him.”
[DOCUMENT
No. 1]
The
interventions of the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Roman and Universal
Inquisition (Holy Office) of 1880-1881
Decree of the Holy Office of
Wednesday, February 26, 1879
The Most Eminent Fathers have
decreed “ad mentem” that a letter be written to the Bishop of Lecce, demanding
an explanation for the publication of this pamphlet and how he authorized it.
They order him to withdraw the copies and prevent their distribution. They also
order a letter to the Archbishop of Lyon, informing him of this publication and
the orders of this Supreme Father. Finally, they order the Patriarch of Venice
not to publish the pamphlet and to neither permit nor consider the proposed
interpretation of the Dogma of the Assumption. Finally, they call upon and
admonish the French priest at the Little Savior to cease such efforts and
images.
B) Decree of the Holy Office of
Wednesday, March 10, 1880,
The Most Eminent Fathers as regards
the Bishop of Lecce to rule and pronounce [ ad supersedendum et ad
mentem ]: it is their thought to beseech the Holy Father to give the
writing which Melanie sent to His Holiness by means of the Most Eminent
Consolini, as the latter said to Cardinal Ferrieri, writing which contains the
secret revelation which the same claims to have received, and this in order to
be able to compare the revelation itself with that which is published [It turns
out, they are entirely different], and to examine it intrinsically and
extrinsically, to see if this revelation should be held to be true or not in
all its parts.
C) Decree of the Holy Office of
June 2, 1880
The Most Eminent Lords “ad mentem”:
The opinion is to write to the Bishop of Lecce that he should no longer concern
himself with Melanie and that he should interrupt all relations with her, and
that this should be done by this Supreme Congregation.
Let the Sacred Congregation of
Bishops and Regulars respond to the Bishop of Castellamare by explaining to him
all that has been done to calm the apprehensions aroused by the Opuscule of the
said Melanie: that Monsignor the Bishop be asked to continue to watch over her
and take care of her, and that he not allow her to leave his diocese.
Let us examine the aforementioned
pamphlet, striving to obtain the most complete edition of it.
D) Second letter from Cardinal
Caterini, Secretary of the Holy Office to Mgr Zola, Bishop of Lecce, dated June
5, 1880
Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord
and brother, by mandate received from the Supreme Assembly, I must inform Your
Lordship that the opinion of these Most Eminent General Inquisitors, fully
approved by His Holiness, is that you should no longer concern yourself with
Melanie, and that you should interrupt all relations with her.
I hasten to point this out to you
for your standard and guidance, after which all that remains is for me to wish
you all the blessings of the Lord.
E) Opinion of the Consultors and
decree of the Holy Office of Monday 26 July and Tuesday 3 August 1880
Second holiday, July 26,
1880
The Lords Consultors were of the
opinion: Let a letter now be written to the archbishops of Gaul and Italy under
the secret of the Holy Office “ad mentem”: The opinion [of the Holy Office] is
that the revelations of Melanie which are being printed and disseminated
everywhere cannot be considered authentic or sound with regard to doctrine:
that therefore, without prejudice in any way to the cult which is given to the
Blessed Virgin under the title of La Salette, not only do they not approve them
in any way, but that they ensure that the aforementioned revelations are not
printed or disseminated in their Dioceses and those of their suffragan
dioceses, but that they even prudently withdraw them wherever they are already
found to be spread.
As for the pamphlet leaked to the
press, four [of the consultors] were of the opinion that it should be
prohibited by a decree of the fourth week. But let the decree remain under the
secrecy of the Holy Office, to be published only if and when the Most Eminent
Fathers deem it useful and opportune.
The third holiday, instead of the
fourth, was held on August 3, 1880.
The Most Eminent Lords, “ad mentem”
(in their opinion): their advice is that if any request is made, such as that
presented by the Superior of the Missionaries of La Salette, the response
should be: that the Holy See does not wish this pamphlet to be distributed, but
wishes it withdrawn from where it is already circulating. This should also be
repeated to the Bishop of Castellammare, instructing him to inform Mélanie of
these measures taken by the Holy See concerning her pamphlet, and to forbid her
from writing anything similar, and especially from providing any explanations
about this pamphlet.
F) Letter from Cardinal Prospero
Caterini, Cardinal Secretary of the Holy Office, to Bishop Cortet of Troyes,
dated August 14, 1880
Most Illustrious and Reverend Lord
and Brother,
The Sacred Congregation of the
Index has delivered to the Supreme Congregation Your Grace's letter concerning
the pamphlet entitled “The Apparition of the Most Holy Virgin on the
Mount of La Salette.” Now, the Most Eminent Fathers, with me,
Inquisitors General, deemed worthy of the highest praise the zeal you displayed
in denouncing the said pamphlet; for you must know that its publication was not
at all pleasing to the Holy See: therefore, its will is that copies of this
booklet, wherever they have been put into circulation, be, as far as possible,
withdrawn from the hands of the faithful.
In fulfilling the duties of my
office, I renew to Your Grace the expression of my best sentiments and I pray
the Lord to grant all the wishes for happiness that I make for you.
H) Decree of the Holy Office of
Wednesday, February 16, 1881
A translation of the original unpublished Latin text is preserved in the
Archives of the Holy Office.
Fourth holiday, February 16, 1881
The Holy Office has decided: that a
letter should be written 1° to the Bishop of Lecce “ad mentem”: the spirit [of
the Holy Office] is to tell him that this Supreme Congregation and His
Holiness are highly astonished that he has written letters relating to this
matter in disobeying the orders received, and that he is referring the
matter.
2° That we write to the Bishop of
Castellamare “ad mentem”: The spirit [of the Holy Office is] that he renews to
Sister Melanie the prohibition to continue what she continues to do by
threatening her in case of transgression, with the deprivation of the use of
the Sacraments.
[DOCUMENT
#2]
TWO
BOOKS BY ABBE COMBE PLACED ON THE INDEXING
On June 7, 1901, Abbé Combe's
work, The Great Coup, with its probable date: A Study of the
Secret of La Salette (1894), was
placed on the Index; then, on April 12, 1907, another of the same author's works The Secret Of Melanie, Shepherdess Of La Salette, And The Current
Crisis (1906),
was placed on the Index. (cf. for example: Annals of Our Lady of La
Salette – 51st year – January 19, 1916 – p. 551; note 20).
|
|
|
[DOCUMENT
No. 3]
CONDEMNATION
OF ABBÉ RIGAUD AND HIS MAGAZINE
On December 11, 1910, L'Osservatore
Romano published the following information:
“For several years, a periodical
entitled Annales Mensuelles Des Croisés De Marie Et Des Apôtres Des Derniers
Temps has been published in Limoges (France) by the priest Ernest Rigaud,
without the permission of the diocesan authority prescribed by the Apostolic
Constitution Officiorum, in which, without taking into account the reservations
imposed by Urban VIII, supposed miracles and prophecies are reported in an
extremely incorrect and insulting form for high ecclesiastical dignitaries.
The faithful are warned against
such a publication, and strongly urged to refrain from reading it and to give
it any support whatsoever.”
Cardinal Merry del Val, secretary of the Holy Office,
confirmed this note from L'Osservatore Romano of December 10, 1910, by a letter
dated January 30, 1911:
From the Vatican, January 30, 1911
To His Excellency Bishop
Firmin-Léon-Joseph Renouard, Bishop of Limoges
Your Grace,
It has just been reported to the
Holy See that the communiqué from L'Osservatore Romano dated December 11, 1910,
concerning 'The Monthly Annals of the Crusaders of Mary and the Apostles of the
Last Days,’ is considered inauthentic, and that its entire scope and value are
being contested.
Therefore, I wish to declare to
Your Excellency that this communiqué is perfectly authentic and has a directive
value; public opinion can no longer be deceived by false and disloyal
maneuvers.
Following this declaration, Your
Excellency will not fail to take the measures that you deem appropriate in this
regard.
I take this opportunity to express
to you, Your Grace, my sentiments entirely devoted to Our Lord.
Cardinal Merry del Val
Letter
of Pope Pius X against the rebellious priest Abbot Rigaud, July 1, 1911
Monsignor Renouard, Bishop of
Limoges, declared Abbot Ernest Rigaud suspended from his priestly duties and
forbade him to publish his magazine (February 18, 1911) as well as to celebrate
Holy Mass (May 26, 1911).
To the Venerable Brother
Firmin-Joseph Renouard,bishop of Limoges
Venerable Brother,
We come to inform you of the
profound sorrow caused Us by the conduct of a priest of your diocese, Fr.
Ernest Rigaud. Under the pretext of promoting an association he founded and
supporting devotion to Our Lady of La Salette, he rebels against
your legitimate authority, disregards your warnings and decrees,
and shows no regard for the suspension you were obliged to impose upon him. But
there is more. Abusing simple acknowledgments of receipt he may have received
from Rome some time ago, and whose meaning he interprets and distorts as he
pleases, this unfortunate priest boasts of having Our authorization and
approval to act as he does and to propagate his strange doctrine. He
concludes from this that the Pope alone has the right to attack his writings
and that only the Pope can strike him. After the explicit notification
published by Our Order, he contests the authenticity of this act, despite a
formal letter addressed to you on this matter by Our Cardinal Secretary of
State. He adds to this outrageous publications about you and several bishops of
France, causing a true scandal among the faithful. Faced with
such excesses, attested to by the file before Us, and having now exhausted all
the avenues that pity and forbearance might suggest, We have no other
recourse than to invite you to address a final admonition to this misguided
priest and to tell him, in Our name, that if he does not immediately and
completely renounce his errors and his deplorable behavior, We will have to
resort to the most severe ecclesiastical penalties. In the hope that Our
Lord will deign to enlighten this priest's soul and call him back to the truth
and to his duty, We unite Our prayers with Yours for this purpose and
wholeheartedly impart to You, Venerable Brother, to your clergy, and to all the
faithful of your diocese, the Apostolic Blessing.
Rome,
from the Vatican, July 1, 1911
Pius PP X
DOCUMENT
No. 4
ACTS
OF THE HOLY SEE
SACRED SUPREME CONGREGATION OF THE
HOLY OFFICE
DECREE concerning what is commonly
called “The Secret of La Salette”
This Supreme Congregation (of the
Holy Office) has been informed that certain persons, even members of the
clergy, disregarding the responses and decisions of the said Sacred
Congregation, continue in books, pamphlets, and journal articles, both signed and
anonymous, to discuss and address what is called the secret of La Salette, its
various aspects, and its applications to the present and future, without the
permission and even against the prohibition of the Ordinaries. To suppress
these abuses, which harm true piety and gravely offend ecclesiastical
authority, the said Sacred Congregation forbids all the faithful in every
country to discuss and address the subject in question, under any pretext and
in any form whatsoever: books, pamphlets, articles, whether signed or
anonymous, or in any other manner.
All those who violate this
prohibition of the Holy Office, if they are priests, will be deprived of any
dignity they may hold, and the Ordinary will suspend them with a prohibition
against hearing confessions and celebrating Mass; if they are laymen, they will
be refused the sacraments until they have come to repentance.
Moreover, both will incur the
penalties prescribed by Leo XIII (Constitution Officiorum ac munerum ) against
those who, without legitimate permission from superiors, publish works on
religious subjects, and by Urban VIII
(decree Sanctissimus Dominus Noster , March 13, 1625) against those who,
without the authorization of the Ordinaries, spread alleged revelations in the
public.
However, this decree does not
condemn devotion to Our Lady of Reconciliation, commonly known as Our Lady of
La Salette.
This decree was transmitted two
days later to the Bishop of Grenoble by Monsignor Donato Sbaretti, titular
archbishop of Ephesus and assessor of this Supreme Congregation. Here is the
text and translation of this dispatch note:
Supreme Sacred Congregation of the
Holy Office
Rome, December 23, 1915.
Along with this letter, I am
sending Your Grace a copy of the decree of this Supreme Congregation, which
forbids any publication concerning what is called “The Secret of La Salette” .
Please accept all the wishes and
greetings I have for you.
Your
most devoted servant,
Assessor
To the Most Reverend Father Monsignor the Bishop of Grenoble
SUPREME
SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE
Rome,
February 7, 1916
Illustrious
and Most Reverend Lord,
In
the supplement to the newspaper La Croix (supplement to issue no. 10,074) of January 12 of
this year, following the account of the decree of this Supreme Congregation of
December 21, 1915, concerning what is commonly called the secret of La
Salette, one can read certain conclusions drawn, it seems, from La
Semaine religieuse, in which it is implied that, by this decree, the fact
of the apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary at La Salette is recognized. I
hereby wish to inform Your Grace, on behalf of this same Congregation, that the
intention of the Holy Office in issuing that decree was not to formulate a
judgment or express an opinion on the fact of the apparition, and that the
conclusions cited above must be corrected accordingly.
Please
accept all the wishes and greetings I have for you.
Of
Your Grace,
The
most devoted servant in the Lord.
R. Card. Merry
del Va
DOCUMENT No. 5
Ex Acta Apostolicæ Sedis – Annus VIII – Volumen VIII – p.
175.
Acts of the Sacred Congregations
Supreme
Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office — Declaration concerning a certain work.
STATEMENT regarding a work
Wednesday, April 12, 1916:
In the general assembly of this
Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend
Lords Cardinals, Inquisitors General in matters of Faith and morals, declared
that the work whose title is as follows: The Lesson of the Hospital of
Our Lady of Ypres – Exegesis of the Secret of La Salette – by Dr.
Henri Mariavé, Volume I, Paris, 1915; Volume II, Appendices, Montpellier, 1915,
was condemned and proscribed by the general rules of the Constitution Officiorum
ac munerum.
Given in Rome, at the Palace of the
Holy Office, on April 13, 1916.
SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE INDEX:
DECREE Monday, June 5, 1916
The sacred Congregation of the Most
Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, appointed and
delegated throughout Christendom by His Holiness Pope Benedict XV to the Index
of Books of Evil Doctrine, to their Proscription and Permission, meeting in the
Apostolic Palace of the Vatican on June 5, 1916, condemned and condemns,
proscribed and proscribed, commanded and commands that the following works,
condemned and proscribed elsewhere, be placed in the Index of Prohibited Books:
… Dr Henri Mariavé, The lesson of the Notre-Dame d'Ypres hospital. Exegesis
of the secret of La Salette , volume I, Paris, 1915; volume
II, Appendices, Montpellier, 1915 ( Decree S. Off. 12 Apr. 1916).
Therefore, let no one, of whatever
rank or condition, dare to publish in the future the condemned and proscribed
works cited above or to read or keep those published, under the penalties
indicated in the Index of Prohibited Books.
This having been reported by me,
the secretary, to His Holiness Pope Benedict XV, His Holiness approved this
decree and ordered that it be promulgated. In witness whereof, etc…
Given in Rome, on June 6, 1916.
DOCUMENT No. 6
Ex Acta Apostolicae Sedis – Annus XV – Vol. XV – p. 287.
ACTA SS. CONGREGATIONUM
SUPREMA SACRA CONGREGATIO S. OFFICII
Condemnation of the pamphlet: “The
Apparition of the Most Holy Virgin of La Salette”
DECREE
Wednesday, May 9, 1923
In the general assembly of the
Congregation of the Holy Office, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals
in charge of the care of the faith and morals proscribed and condemned the
pamphlet The Apparition of the Most Holy Virgin on the holy mountain of La Salette,
on Saturday, September 19, 1845 - Simple reprint of the complete text published
by Mélanie, etc… (St. Augustine Society, Paris-Rome-Bruges, 1922), enjoining
on them the right to remove the condemned pamphlet from the hands of the
faithful.
On the same day, His Holiness Pope
Pius XI, in the ordinary audience granted to the Reverend Assessor of the Holy
Office, approved the decision taken by the Most Eminent Cardinals.
Given in Rome, at the Palace of the
Holy Office, on May 10, 1923.
Louis Castellano,
Notary of the Holy Office
Page from the Index with the
inclusion of the book "The Apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary on the
Holy Mountain of La Salette, Saturday, September 19, 1845" on the Index
[DOCUMENT No. 7]
SUPREMA SACRA CONGREGAZIONE
DEL SANTO OFFIZIO
Prot. No. 1879 – 88 No. 13
SUPREME SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE
HOLY OFFICE
From the Palace of the Holy Office,
January 8, 1957.
Very Reverend Father,
By your petition dated December 14,
1956, Your Most Reverend Father submitted the following question to the Holy
Office: “Whether by the decree of May 9, 1923, the Supreme Congregation of the
Holy Office intended to condemn the booklet The Apparition of the Most Holy
Virgin on the Holy Mountain of La Salette, on Saturday, September 19, 1845…”
(Société Saint-Augustin, Paris – Rome – Bruges, 1922, of 40 pages); or whether
[the decree] concerns only the booklet put into circulation with the addition
of the letter from Dr. Mariavé (alias Dr. Grémillon of Montpellier), that is to
say with 11 additional pages.
In this regard, your Father noted
that, in certain circles, it was argued that the pamphlet, denounced and
condemned by the Holy Office, was not precisely the one that was published by
the Saint-Augustin Society, but the only one that, distributed without the
knowledge of the publishers and the Author, contained a letter from Mariavé,
dated February 2, 1923.
Consequently, I feel it my duty to
inform you that this Supreme Congregation has examined and condemned, by the
aforementioned decree, the aforementioned pamphlet, published and distributed
by the Saint Augustine Society, even without the letter from Dr. Mariavé.
I am taking advantage of this
circumstance… etc.
G. Card. Pizzardo,
secretary.
SOME
HISTORICAL REMARKS ON THE PUBLISHED DOCUMENTS
[DOCUMENT No. 1]
The publication of “The Secret” in
1879, with the imprimatur of Bishop Zola of Lecce, provoked a reaction from
several Bishops.
It seems that the denunciation of
the pamphlet to the Holy See came from two different sources. On the one hand,
there was a letter of denunciation from the Bishop of Troyes, Mgr Cortet, dated
February 15 and sent on February 16, 1880 to the nunciature in Paris; the
denunciation was transmitted to the Sacred Congregation of the Index by a
letter dated February 28. On June 13, 1880, Father A. Eschbach, rapporteur of
the Index, formulated his “Votum” on the question, judging that it should be
dealt with by the Holy Office ( “I do not believe that it belongs to
our Holy Congregation of the Index to judge and resolve such questions, but on
the contrary to that of the Holy Office. Therefore, in order to answer the
question which was made to me as Rapporteur of the Index by His Most Reverend
Father, the Reverend Father Saccheri, Secretary of the Congregation, I would
say that, according to my humble judgment and remaining subject to any other
more authoritative judgment, the said pamphlet referred to the Index by His
Excellency the Nuncio of Paris, should be transmitted with the attached
documents to the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office” Corteville,
pp. 253-254). On the other hand, the Holy Office had already taken an interest
in the matter, as recalled in his report by the Consultor to the Holy Office,
Father Bernard Smith OSB: “By order of the Holy Father, the Most
Eminent Cardinal Bartolini personally handed over and denounced to the Supreme
Congregation on February 19th of this year, the booklet in French by Mélanie,
printed in Lecce with the approval of this Curia at the end of 1879” (Corteville,
p. 262). It was probably the Patriarch of Venice who had prompted this
intervention by the Holy Office: as there was indeed a desire to publish an
edition of the “Secret” in his diocese, he had written about it on January
19th. Consequently, the Holy Office was already addressing the issue on
February 19, 1880.
Document A). At the meeting of the Holy
Office on February 19, 1880, it was decided that the Commissioner of the Holy
Office would present a report on the matter at the following meeting, on
February 26. It is on the basis of this report that the document we are quoting
in Corteville's translation was drawn up. The “French priest” referred
to was Abbé Crévoulin, of the Church of the Holy Savior in Rome. Therefore, on
February 28, applying the decree of the Holy Office, the Secretary of the Holy
Inquisition, Cardinal Prospero Caterini, wrote a letter to Cardinal Caverot,
Bishop of Lyon, in whose diocese Mélanie's pamphlet was being distributed, and
to Bishop Zola, Bishop of Lecce, in whose diocese it had been printed (both
letters have been lost). Cardinal Caverot replied on March 7 (text of the
letter published by Corteville, p. 259), saying that he himself was preparing
to denounce the pamphlet to the Holy Office when he received Cardinal
Caterini's letter. As for Bishop Zola, he replied on March 6 (text in
Corteville, pp. 255-258), explaining that the “Secret” had already been printed
in Grenoble (from 1871 to 1874) by C.R. Girard, and in Naples in 1873 by Abbé
Félicien Bliard, with the approval of Cardinal Sisto Riario Sforza. Mélanie –
wrote Bishop Zola on March 6 – “ placed the original manuscript of the
La Salette revelations in my hands as early as 1869.” Questioned many times by
myself, and put to the test, she declared to me constantly and identically at
different times, and in all cases, that she had only sincerely and faithfully
reproduced in her writing, the very words pronounced by the Most Holy Virgin at
La Salette, according to which she had also written to Pius IX in 1851"
(“più volte da me interrogata e messa alla prova, mi dichiarò costantemente and
identically in various times, ed in any case, it is in its writing that it is
not written that it is reproduced and faithfully spoken by Ssma Vergine on
Salette ; 3, p. 124, note 54. Here, however, is what Bishop Zola
himself wrote to Girard on November 8: “in the secret written to the
Pope there are things that are not in the one [an illegible
word] to Bishop Bliard, and even in this there are others not entrusted
to the Pope” (cf. Stern, ibid. , p. 119, note 38; for
the comparison between the 1851 text and that of 1879, see the texts). The
Bishop of Lecce concluded, however, as follows (in his letter of March 6):“Finally,
I note for Your Eminence that, upon receiving orders from this Supreme
Congregation, I have already retrieved the few copies of the booklet that were
with the publisher in Lecce. I have also written to Mélanie, to whom the
complete edition was sent by the publisher himself, asking her to return to me
any copies that might be in her possession and that she could retrieve from
France. This is all I had to say to You, in accordance with the orders
communicated by Your Eminence, and I declare once again that I am ready to
receive with the required submission whatever the Holy See deems appropriate
and deems necessary in this matter.” (See Corteville, p. 258; original
Italian text in Galli, p. 220).
Document B). From Castellamare, Mélanie
left for Rome on November 24, 1878 (to submit the religious Rule of the “Order
of the Mother of God” to the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars), and
she remained there until May 5 of the following year (cf. Abbé Gouin, Sister
Marie de la Croix, Shepherdess of La Salette, born Mélanie Calvat, Tertiary of
Saint Dominic, Victim of Jesus, Téqui, 1969, pp. 118-129). On December
3, 1878, Mélanie was received in private audience by Pope Leo XIII. On this
occasion, he consulted Cardinals Guidi, Ledochowski, and Consolini about the
Secret, and the latter had the text transmitted to the Pope. A few months
later, the Secret was printed in Lecce. That is why the Holy Office is asking
to compare the text of the Secret given to Cardinal Consolini with the text
printed in Lecce.
Document C). This document is the Holy
Office's response to the letter (dated May 30, 1880) to Cardinal Caterini from
Bishop Vincenzo Maria Sarnelli of Castellammare, the diocese where Mélanie
resided (text in Corteville, p. 260). The Bishop complained that Mélanie had
been directed without his knowledge by Bishop Zola, and he asked whether
“ the Holy See permitted the distribution of the book ” and
whether it authorized Mélanie to leave the diocese.
Document D). This letter from Cardinal
Caterini to Bishop Zola (it is the second he wrote to him, the first having
been lost) is a consequence of the decree of the Holy Office reproduced in the
preceding document. Bishop Zola replied on June 26 (text in Corteville, pp.
261-262) stating that for seven years now, that is, since his elevation to the
episcopate, he had no longer been the head of Mélanie.
Document E). The Holy Office had decided
on June 2 (Document C) to have Mélanie's pamphlet examined. The Benedictine
Father Bernard Smith, a consultor to the Holy Office, was entrusted with this
task, and on July 5, 1880, he submitted his printed report (text in Corteville,
pp. 262-268), to which another consultor, Father Alessandro Del Magno, Dean of
the Rota, replied in a handwritten text dated July 26 (text in Corteville, pp.
269-271). On the same day, the Consultors reached the conclusion reported in
this document, while on August 3, the Inquisitors limited themselves (as
reported in the document cited here) to silencing Mélanie and having the
pamphlet withdrawn from sale. The Superior of the Missionaries of La Salette,
mentioned in the decree, was Father Archier represented by Bishop Bernard,
missionary of La Salette and apostolic prefect of Norway.
Document F). In application of the
previous decree (decree of August 3, document E) Cardinal Caterini wrote on
August 8 to Father Archier, Superior of the Missionaries of La Salette (the
letter is in the Archives of the General House of the Missionaries in Rome),
and to Bishop Sarnelli, Bishop of Castellamare ( “forbid him both to
write such things again and to give explanations on things already written” quoted
by Stern, note 43; a copy of the letter communicated to Mélanie is kept in the
Archives of the postulation of the Rogationists in Rome), and on August 14, to
the Bishop of Tarantaise (who had written to the Holy Office) and to Bishop
Cortet, Bishop of Troyes, who had denounced Mélanie’s pamphlet to the Nuncio in
Paris.
Contrary to these letters from
Cardinal Caterini, the lawyer Maître Amédée Nicolas publicly defended the
“secrecy,” prompting the publication of the letter to the Bishop of Troyes in
the Semaine religieuse de Nîmes , followed by numerous
“warnings” from French bishops (see Stern, vol. 3, pp. 120-122; Cardinal
Caterini’s letter to the Bishop of Troyes was published by about a dozen
diocesan bulletins: see Corteville, p. 274). Until the publication, in 2000, by
Abbé Corteville of the unpublished documents of the Holy Office reproduced
here, Cardinal Caterini’s letter (document F) was practically the only text
from the file relating to the year 1880 known to the general public.
It has been said of Cardinal
Caterini's letter that it was a private initiative of the Cardinal, undertaken
without the knowledge of the Congregation: “Clearly ,” wrote
Bishop Galli in 2001, “ the prohibition imposed on the prelate [Bishop
Zola] was not the result of a decision taken collegially ‘by the
Eminent Inquisitors General’ in full agreement with the Holy See… The
Congregation had not been convened, nor had the Holy See been informed” (p.
222). The published documents demonstrate the contrary. “ According to
Nicolas (Nouvelle défense… Nîmes, 1884, p. 63), the ellipses that appear at the
end of the document in this publication [by the Semaine Religieuse de Nîmes on
September 4, 1880] replace words that were supposed to read: 'As for the
clergy, the secret must be kept in their hands so that they may benefit from
it.' The facsimile of the letter published in the Annales [de La Salette] May
1913, pp. 363-364, shows that the ellipses actually replace the closing
salutation ” (Stern, vol. 3, p. 122, note 46). Abbé Corteville (a
supporter of the “Secrets”), who also reproduces the original text, confirms
this fact, thus debunking the legend spread by Maître Nicolas.
Document G). Bishop Fava of Grenoble did
not deem it appropriate to publish Cardinal Caterini's letter in the
journal Annales de Notre-Dame de la Salette (document of August
20 , 1880; cited by Corteville, p. 274). The Holy Office
(document G) preferred that the matter remain confidential .
However, on August 24, the Bishop of Grenoble wrote to Father Archier, superior
of the Missionaries of La Salette, requesting that the pamphlet not be
distributed, but rather withdrawn from the public, exactly as the Holy Office
had ordered (cf. Stern, vol. 3, p. 122).
Document H) . On February 15, 1881,
Bishop Cortet of Troyes presented himself to Leo XIII, who invited him to
address the Commissioner of the Holy Office. In his report the following day
(text in Corteville, pp. 227-228), the Commissioner reported that Bishop Cortet
had denounced three new pamphlets: “The first pamphlet is by the lawyer
Amédée Nicolas, printed in Nîmes [ The New War Waged on the
Miracle of La Salette Under the Cover of the Secret of Melanie, Nîmes,
Péladan, 1880] , which claims to contain two letters from Bishop S.L.
Zola of Lecce. The second is by Mr. Adrien Péladan and has the motto 'Last Word
of the Prophecies, or the Future Unveiled.' The third pamphlet is entitled
'Letters from Bishop Sauveur-Louis Zola of Lecce to a Parish Priest of a
Diocese of France [Abbé Roubaud, Parish Priest of Saint-Tropez] on
the Secret of Melanie,' in which are also contained some letters written by
others and by Mélanie herself.” The Commissioner recalled the
prohibitions of the Holy Office (prohibition against Bishop Zola having
relations with Mélanie, June 2, 1880; prohibition against Mélanie commenting on
or explaining the Secret – letter from the Bishop of Castellammare, August 3,
1880; obligation of silence for Abbé Rigaud, editor of the Annals of
the Crusaders of Mary , communicated in September to the Bishops of
Limoges and Carcassonne). The Commissioner concluded, “It is therefore
evident that neither the Bishop of Lecce nor Mélanie observed the prescriptions
specifically received from this dicastery” (text in Corteville, pp.
277-278). The decision of the Holy Office, dated the same day, February 16,
1881 (document H), was a consequence of this report. Cardinal Caterini
therefore wrote again to Bishop Zola on February 23, 1881, and the latter replied
on March 4, noting that the letters in question had all been written before
receiving the injunction to cease writing on the subject: “ I could not
therefore disobey an order before it was given to me .” Bishop Zola’s
observation was formally true (although not entirely in accordance with the
decree of February 26, 1880), for which “ the First Congregation almost
apologized to Bishop Zola ” (letter from Bishop Sarnelli of
Castellammare, July 26, 1882, to Cardinal Ferrieri, in Corteville, p. 283). The
same Bishop Sarnelli had informed Mélanie of the threat of deprivation of the
sacraments, as he recounts in a letter to Cardinal Caterini, dated February 28,
1881 (in Corteville, p. 282). Bishop Zola adhered to the Holy Office's
prohibition against writing on the subject from 1880 to 1895.
Note on the “Curia style” and Abbot
Corteville’s translation .
Many readers will be perplexed by the Holy Office texts we have published,
firstly because they are a French translation of the original Latin (or
Italian) text, and secondly because they employ technical terminology (the
“Curia style”), which is unusual for the uninitiated. This also presents
difficulties for the translator. Take, for example, the Latin term “mens,” used
in two ways: “ad mentem” and “mens est.” Corteville
often leaves the first expression ( ad mentem ) in Latin
(“ ad mentem”); on another occasion, he translates it as “ to
pronounce .” As for the clause “ mens est ”, he
translates it differently: “ it is of their thought ”
(document B), “ the opinion is ” (documents C, D, E – twice
-), “ the spirit [of the Holy Office] is ”
(document H). The Enciclopedia Cattolica (Vatican City 1949, vol. I, columns
309-310) writes on this subject: “ Ad mentem (iuxta mentem, iuxta
modum). This is one of the formulas very commonly used in the responses
usually given by the dicasteries of the Roman Curia, especially by the
Sacred Congregations, and it has the effect of adding to the rescript some
conditions or modalities that delimit, define, or even modify its overly
absolute or generic meaning, or of prescribing conditions or modalities for its
execution. An interpretation of this kind, which is generally declared by the
words 'Mens est…', is not always made public [as in the case of the
decrees on the 'Secret' of La Salette] , it is communicated only to
those persons interested in the proposed matter .” And Naz, more
succinctly: “ ad mentem: clause by which the decision on the merits is
tempered. The competent Congregation sometimes makes known the reasons which
inspired its sentence” ( Dictionary of Canon Law, Paris
1942, Vol. 3, Apostolic Clauses. Clauses used in their responses by the
Roman Congregations, col. 821).
[DOCUMENT #2]
Abbot Emile Combe, parish priest of
Diou in the Allier (died in 1927), sheltered Mélanie from May 1899 to June 1904
(Mélanie was to die in Altamura on December 14, 1904). It was Abbot Combe who
had passed the manuscript of Mélanie's autobiography to Léon Bloy who published
it under the title: Life of Mélanie, shepherdess of La Salette. Written
by herself in 1900. Her childhood (1831-1846) (Stern, p. 222, note 3).
The first of the condemned books, ' The great coup with its probable
date… ', placed on the Index in 1901, had been printed in Vichy in
1894, and gave as the probable date of the great coup September 19-20, 1896; A
third edition was published in 1896, again in Vichy. The second, ' The
Secret of Melanie… ', published in Rome in 1906, was placed on the
Index of Prohibited Books in 1907, during the pontificate of Saint Pius X. This
second book contains statements attributed to Melanie that constitute a
previously unpublished part of the Secret (Corteville calls it the “second
secret,” p. 307). According to this testimony, the Blessed Virgin Mary revealed
to Melanie, in 1846 at La Salette, that the souls in Limbo will be restored to
a state of innocence and will be able to live in this state on earth (cf. Corteville,
pp. 308–309; “ doctrine of Renewal ”). The books of Abbé
Combe, and their author, enjoyed the highest esteem among the defenders of
Mélanie: here – for example – is what the Bishop of Lecce, Mgr Zola, wrote to
Father Jean Kunzlé on March 5, 1896: “If you wish for more precise
clarification on this subject, you can obtain an interesting booklet: 'The
Great Blow and its Probable Date' recently published by the parish priest of
Diou (Allier), Abbé Combe. At the end of this booklet you will find various
extracts from some of my letters sent to a French priest in 1880. They have
been faithfully reproduced and, as far as La Salette is concerned, they are
accurate.” And Monsignor Zola, in a letter to Abbé Combe dated
February 10, 1896, wrote: “ I have read and weighed every line of your
pamphlet ' The Great Deed and Its Probable Date,' and I can
assure you that everything you have written about the Secret of La Salette is
perfectly accurate. I gladly and unreservedly join in the praise you have
received” (Galli, p. 230, F. Corteville, p. 282). But it was precisely
this book, recommended by Monsignor Zola, that was placed on the Index of
Prohibited Books in 1901.
[DOCUMENT No. 3]
Abbé Rigaud (who died in 1915 while
still under censorship) was one of the most fervent supporters and
disseminators of the “Secret of La Salette,” in defense of which he founded the
journal later condemned by the Holy See. We have already seen (commentary on
document 1H) that as early as September 1880, the Holy Office had intervened
against Abbé Rigaud. This intervention was in vain, since the Church, and even
Saint Pius X himself, had to intervene again in 1911. As can be seen from the
cited documents, Cardinal Merry del Val, Secretary of State to Saint Pius X,
was far from being in favor of the “Secret of La Salette,” to the point that
Max Le Hidec could describe him as “ one of the most influential and
most relentless among the enemies of the Secret” (Max Le Hidec, Les
Secrets de La Salette , p. 118). Abbé Rigaud's attitude is
significant: first he doubts the authenticity of the note published in L'Osservatore
Romano ; then, contradicted by Cardinal Merry del Val, he claims that
only the Pope can judge him; and even when the Pope intervenes he will assert
that the letter of Saint Pius X was forged by the Cardinal Secretary of State…
As we shall see, after the 1923 Index, the supporters of the “Secret” will use
the same method.
[DOCUMENT No. 4]
“This decree originated from the
intervention of several French Bishops, in particular Cardinal de Cabrières,
Bishop of Montpellier, whose attention had been drawn to the 'secret' by the
publications of Dr. H. Grémillon, a military doctor who wrote under the
pseudonym of Dr. Mariavé. The Cardinal requested that the Holy Office examine
not only the doctor's works but also Mélanie's 'secret' (cf. ASV, State
Secretariat, rubr. 82, 1915; letters from Cardinal de Cabrières and Bishop
Latty, Archbishop of Avignon, 1915, published in L'Impartial, first quarter
1988, pp. 11-12)” (Stern,
p. 122, note 48). It should be emphasized that Cardinal de Rovérié de Cabrières
(1830-1921) was not at all sympathetic to modernism and liberalism: in religion
he was an integralist, in politics, a monarchist (Cf. Marcel Bruyère, Le
Cardinal de Cabrières , Ed. du Cèdre, Paris 1956; Emile Poulat, Intégrisme
et catholicisme intégral , Casterman, 1969, p. 329; for the attitude
of integral Catholics regarding 'secrecy', cf. Poulat, op. cit. ,
p. 298). The same cannot be said of the good Father Lepidi, protector to the
end of the leader of Italian modernism, Ernest Buonaiuti (cf. Andreotti, I
quattro del Gesù. Storia di un'eresia , Rizzoli, 1999, pp. 22, 25, 28,
29).
On closer inspection, the 1915
decree merely reapplies the decisions of the Holy Office of 1880 presented in
document no. 1, specifying the canonical penalties for transgressors of the
decree and inserting these decisions into the Acta Apostolicæ Sedis.
Cardinal Merry del Val's letter of
1916 authentically interprets the last lines of the decree: the fact of the
Apparition of the Blessed Virgin at La Salette was not formally recognized by
Rome, but by the Bishop of Grenoble (whose competence it is).
The decree of 1915 had the effect,
among other things, of preventing the publication of a study that Jacques
Maritain – converted by Léon Bloy – was preparing in defense of the
'Secret': “in the present conditions, as far as I am concerned, I
obviously renounce without bitterness the hope of publishing my work” (letter
to Abbé Mollière of January 17, 1916, in Corteville, p. 298), but anonymous
writings continued to circulate even after the decree, and in violation of this
decree (that for example of this same Abbé Mollière, cited by Maritain in a
letter that he wrote to him on March 12, 1916; see Corteville, p. 300).
DOCUMENT No. 5
This concerns the placing on the
Index of Prohibited Books of a work by Dr. Grémillon on the 'Secret of La
Salette,' which he published under the pseudonym Mariavé. The first volume was
published in 1915, before, I believe, the decree mentioned in document 4; the
second, in 1916, that is, after the decree. Both volumes were condemned in
1916.
DOCUMENT No. 5
This is a response from the Holy
Office sent to Bishop Félix Guillibert of the Diocese of Fréjus, to which the
Marquis de la Vauzelle belonged. The Bishop, through a "communication from
the Bishopric" dated January 13, 1916, in accordance with the decree of
December 21, 1915 (document no. 4), had ordered parish priests to refuse
communion to anyone who had not complied with the decree. The Marquis de la
Vauzelle had filed an appeal on March 27, 1916, in a letter addressed to Pope
Benedict XV. The Holy Office rejected this appeal. Henri Prévost de Sauzac de
Puybottier, Marquis de la Vauzelle, was a staunch defender of the "Secret
of La Salette" and, concurrently, of the cause of Karl-Wilhelm Naundorff
(d. 1845), who claimed to be the Dauphin Louis-Charles de Bourbon (Louis XVII),
escaped from the Temple prison. Because of their heterodox doctrines, Naundorff
and Vintras (1807-1875) were condemned by a Brief of Gregory XVI dated November
8, 1843, addressed to the Bishop of Bayeux. On this subject, see the article,
available online, by Emile Appolis: "On the Margins of Contemporary
Catholicism: Millenarian Cordiphores and Naundorffists around the 'Secret' of
La Salette," in Archives de sociologie des religions, no. 14, 1962, pp.
103-121.
[DOCUMENT No. 6]
Some authors have suggested that
the 1923 Index placement and the 1915 decree were a hoax perpetrated by the
notary Castellano. The most recent to put forward this hypothesis was Father
Grossin, to whom I replied in issue 52 of Sodalitium : “Father
Grossin, obviously not very convinced that the decrees of 1915 and 1923 are not
contrary to the “Secret”, puts forward (…) the hypothesis of a conspiracy:
“[The 1915 decree] should be signed by the Cardinal Secretary of the
Holy Office and countersigned by an assessor bishop, which is not the case,
since it is signed by a simple notary: Luigi Castellano, without any title ”;
[And again] “ the decree of May 10, 1923, still signed by the notary
Castellano (is that really a coincidence?), which 'proscribes and condemns the
pamphlet' of Montpellier [sic! The decree does not condemn the
Montpellier pamphlet—by Grémillon/Mariavé—but the one approved by Lepidi and
published by the Saint Augustine Society]. Once again, we find the same
procedural flaws from the same author, and no one protests .” “No one
protests” because the procedural flaws exist only in the imagination of Father
Grossin… One only needs to consult the Acta Apostolicæ Sedis to
realize that all the decrees of the Holy Office are signed by the notary of the
Sacred Congregation, that is to say, by Monsignor Castellano for the period in
question! We reproduce alongside this a photograph of the Acta containing
the 1923 decree, an immediately preceding decree (issued with the same
formalities), and the infamous 1949 decree excommunicating communists, also
signed by the same notary. If the decree on the “Secret” has procedural flaws,
then the 1949 decree also contains the same flaws: perhaps this is a shady plot
by anti-communist clergymen?” ( Sodalitium no. 52, pp. 70-71).
Original of two decrees from the
Holy Office, both signed solely by Notary Castellano. The second is the decree
(of 1923) condemning the pamphlet: "The Apparition of the Blessed Virgin
of La Salette" of 1922.
