Fight, Children of Light, You, the Few Who Can See

Adoration of the Name of Jesus ElGreco

This article by Jean Vaquié was published originally in the counter-revolutionary journal Lecture et Tradition1 in 1990 and then in issue 156 of Action Familiale et Scolaire (AFS). It was subsequently issued as a supplement to AFS No. 225, February 2013. It was published in English in Apropos No. 21, Lent 2003.

Hat Tip: The Eye Witness

Full Article: Apropos – The Preliminary Battle


We may consider it [this article] as a charter for the current counter-revolutionary struggle. The author outlines there three superimposed battles:

• that of MAINTENANCE which has as its object the safeguarding the remnant of Christianity which still remains. It is called the lesser battle;

• that of SUPPLICATION called the preliminary battle;

• that of the TRANSFER OF POWER allowing the return of Christian social order. It pertains directly to God and is called the greater battle.

1. First of all we have to fight to preserve the final positions which remain to us. It is only too apparent and necessary, to preserve our chapels, our few monasteries, our schools, our pub1ications, our associations, and more generally our hope of salvation and the orthodoxy of our doctrines. We have are thus involved in a series of small battles which we cannot avoid in order to conserve what we have.

Indeed, we find a mention of these fights in Holy Scripture itself. St John the Evangelist, under the dictation of ‘He that hath the seven spirits of God and the seven stars ‘, that is, under the dictation of Our Lord, addresses himself to the Angel of the Church of Sardis by saying: ‘Esto vigilens et confirma cetera quae moritura erant ‘which means ‘Be watchful and strengthen the things that remain, which are ready to die’ (Apoc.3:2).

The Church of Sardis, we know, corresponds to our time. This admonition, ‘Strengthen the things that remain’ is therefore addressed to us – Heaven expects us to protect the things that remain. This formulates our mission. This constitutes our daily counter-revolutionary struggle. Such is the lesser battle, a defensive battle, a battle of maintenance.

2. But over and above these innumerable defensive commitments, an even more important battle has begun the objective of which is the transfer of power. ‘I will reign in spite of my enemies ‘. Who among us could have forgotten this laconic but formal promise, which Our Lord made to St. Margaret-Mary in 1689? To her alone, it could be enough. But it was renewed, during the 19th and 20th centuries, to a great number of mystics, and in particular to Madam Royer. And when one considers the vow resulting from the repetition of the promise, one can affirm that the reign of the Sacred Heart was promised to us under oath. We can therefore be assured that today Our Lord is operating mysteriously in His own way, to extirpate the power of the Beast and to establish His own reign. This mysterious fight, of which He is the essential agent, constitutes the greater battle with that transfer of power as its main objective.

These two battles both correspond to the Divine Will. We believe we can no more escape from one than the other. They are intermingled because they are both supported by the same combatants who thus have two different battles to fight. It is of prime importance to distinguish between the two battles because they do not have the same objective and consequently they are not susceptible to the same strategy. In particular the part which falls to God and that which falls to men differs greatly from one battle to the other.

. . .

Unfavourable legal position

Traditionalists are aware of the importance of defending God’s laws against the power of the Beast. It is from this that they derive their inspiration and confidence. But they imagine too easily that this principled stance gives a position of legal superiority over the secular State.2 They take to the streets brandishing the Decalogue and the Gospel and accuse the State of having broken them. They present them before mayors, prefects and ministers saying: “It is your duty, by divine law, which is above all human laws, to forbid abortion, euthanasia, [same-sex ‘marriage’], public blasphemy, the construction of mosques and the massive naturalisation of Moslems”.

But do we not see that it is now a bit too late to be making these speeches. It was necessary in the first place to have opposed the constitution and secularisation of the State.

. . .

In the “everyday” battle which we must undertake we are reduced to the means of secular legality which, besides, will become more and more rigorous, and always reducing further our means of defence.

A Socialist legality is in place in which Christians and their God will be considered as public enemies. We understand that such a situation is vexing for traditionalists and their leaders.

If, however, under the context of exploiting a divine, imprescriptible law, we were to begin a war of principle against the secular State, we would transgress the limits of the lesser battle by entering the field of the superior battle which requires a very different strategy as we will see.

Maintaining our lamps

The everyday battle is not a decisive battle. The traditional forces committed to it do not have the means to effect such a breakthrough. Their appropriate ministry is to protect ‘the things that remain which are ready to die.’

. . .

A Strategy of Prudence

Concerning the conduct of the defensive battle, two preliminary observations are necessary:
• This battle has only secondary objectives;
• No exceptional divine assistance is promised.

Consequently, the lesser battle must be directed according to the usual processes of human government. If our recollection does not deceive us, St Thomas will point us in the right direction.

We are told that one evening he arrived to spend the night in a monastery where they were electing an Abbot. ‘We elected the most learned!’ they told him. Saint Thomas objected: ‘If he is the most learned, then let him teach!’ The monks began the election again. ‘This time we elected the most pious.’ ‘If he is the most pious’, he said, ‘then let him pray’. They began the election again for the third time ‘We have now elected the most prudent’. ‘Then, if he is the most prudent, at last, let him rule!’
The defensive battle must be led with prudence.


Get AQ Email Updates

Leave a Reply