Our Lady At La
Salette
And The Heresy of Melanianism
©Lucio
Mascarenhas. April 18, 2004; Revised, March 2008. Retrieved & republished, with
minor proofreading edits, March 23, 2026, from https://geocities.ws/prakashjm45/contramelanianism.html
LIE: "Rome will lose the faith & become the Seat of the
Antichrist...." — Words alleged spoken by Our Lady of La Salette to Melanie
Calvat in 1846 A.D., & falsely sold by Pseudo-Catholic heretics as being
fully approved by the Church's magisterium!
As a matter of fact, this message
is a latter forgery put out & insinuated into the authentic & approved
LaSalette Apparition message after,
& against , the Vatican Council, 1869-1870, & has been repeatedly &
consistently condemned & proscribed by every Pope from Pius IX to Pius XII,
& no Catholic may lawfully approve or teach it!
This article includes
text from the Abbe de Nantes' pages on the same subject.
See also: Why I Am Unapologetically Roman, Romanist, Romish or Romist, Popish Or Popist!
I had studied the
book, "The Church Teaches — Documents of the Catholic Church in
English Translation" by the Jesuit Fathers of St. Mary's College,
St. Mary's, Kansas, 1955, reprinted by TAN Books, 1973. It was while I was
reading the Council of the Vatican's Dogmatic Constitution, "Pastor
AEternus" that I became convinced of the Catholic Doctrine of
Roman Indefectibility — & of the implications that that Doctrine holds for "Catholic
Traditionalism."
In my long battle to uphold this Doctrine, I was certain of other, older texts
upon which "Pastor AEternus" was based, & which
provided backing-up for the Doctrine, but unfortunately, because of my
laziness, I did not take the trouble to seek them out again, transcribe them &
use them as reinforcement for the Doctrine.
However, recently, while writing out a minor tract, sort of, against the heresy
of Ecumenism, I rediscovered these texts.
It is with great pleasure that I made the acquaintance, once again, of these
texts. One text, however, stands out, for a particular reason.
Frequently, in official texts, the name Roman Church is used ambiguously, both
for the Church of Rome, as a particular community of believers, & for the
Universal Church, of which, the name "Roman" is one of its
attributes, being governed by the Bishop of Rome as the Supreme Pastor on
Earth, in succession to the Supreme position conferred on St. Peter by our
Lord.
However, in this one particular text, this ambiguity is necessarily absent, as
it juxtaposes these two distinct realities & sets out the relationship
between them.
Therefore, without any further ado, I present to the reader the IInd.
Holy & Ecumenical Council of Lyons, under Pope Gregory the Xth.,
in 1274AD:
"The same holy Roman Church also has supreme & full primacy
& jurisdiction over the whole Catholic Church. This it truly & humbly
recognizes as received from the Lord Himself in the person of St. Peter, the
Prince or head of the Apostles, whose successor in the fullness of power is the
Roman Pontiff. And just as the holy Roman Church is bound more than all the
others to defend the truth of faith, so, if there arise any questions
concerning the faith, they must be decided by its judgment.
"Anyone who is aggrieved may appeal to it in matters pertaining to the
ecclesiastical court; & in all cases that require ecclesiastical
investigation, one may have recourse to its judgment.
"Also, all churches are subject to it, & their prelates render it
obedience & reverence.
"There is such a fullness of power vested in this Church that it admits
other churches to a share in its responsibility; & many of these,
especially the patriarchal churches, the same Roman Church has honored with
various privileges. Yet always its special position has remained intact, both
in general councils & in some others."
Amen.
What is obvious is that the sensus of the above text entirely
and absolutely excludes any possibility that the Church of Rome could ever fall
away from the True Faith, as had, for example, the Church of Constantinople at
least five times: Under the Patriarchs Nestorius, Acacius, Sergius the
Monothelite, Photius & Michael Caerularius….
What would one be obliged, then, to make, if someone sidled up & claimed to
have received revelations that the Church of Rome would fall?
Dismiss this nonsense with the contempt due, of course! Any doubts?
Melanie Calvat was one
of the two shepherds to whom our Lady appeared at La Salette, France, in 1846AD.
After investigating the claim of the vision & the message, the Bishop of
Grenoble certified the vision as genuine.
Melanie Calvat, however, had a troubled career & kept on wandering from
place to place, & institution to institution, unable to cope or settle in.
Later, she came into contact with a rather eclectic class of people who dabbled
in mysticism, under whose influence she began to claim that our Lady had given
her certain messages, including that "Rome
will lose the Faith & become the seat of the Antichrist."
The Bishop of Grenoble, Msgr. Ginoulhiac, was forced to act against Melanie &
her claims of additional visions & of new messages. These were found to be
contrary to the faith, & the Bishop was forced to formally announce that
the Apparitions of La Salette had come to an end.
In 1854, the Bishop wrote of the additional "messages" that Melanie
put out after the approval of the Apparition, that "the predictions
attributed to Melanie... have no basis in fact: they have no importance with
regard to La Salette... they have come after La Salette & have nothing to
do with it."
The bishop added: "The children were given the broadest freedom to amend
or deny any statement they may have made, but they have never altered anything
on the veracity of the event of La Salette."
With this in mind, Bishop Ginoulhiac, on September 19, 1855AD, proclaimed the
following from the Holy Mountain of La Salette, where our Lady had appeared to
the two visionaries: "The mission of the shepherds is herewith ended, that
of the Church begins."
In 1854, an English priest brought Melanie to England. She entered the
Carmelite convent of Darlington the following year: she took temporary vows
there in 1856, but left the convent in 1860.
She tried religious life again with the Sisters of Compassion of Marseille.
After a stay in their convent at Cephalonia in Greece, & a short sojourn at
the Carmelite convent of Marseille, she returned to the Compassion for a brief
time.
Following short stays at Corps & La Salette, she went to live at
Castellamare di Stabia, near Naples in Italy. She resided there seventeen
years, writing her "secrets" as well as a rule for a future
foundation. The Vatican urged the local bishop to forbid her this type of
publication, but she persisted in her search for approbation & an
imprimatur, even extracting a hearing from a papal official, Bishop Lepidi.
This, however, never constituted even a veiled approval. The authority invoked
by Melanie is incompetent in the matter.
After a stay at Cannes in the south of France, Melanie travelled to
Chalon-sur-Saone, seeking to found a community with the sponsorship of the
Canon de Brandt of Amiens. Eventually she entered into litigation with Bishop
Perraud, the ordinary of Autun.
The Holy See, brought into the matter, decided in favor of the bishop.
In 1892, Melanie returned to a place near Lecce, Italy, then journeyed to
Messina in Sicily on the invitation of Canon Annibale di Francia.
Following a few months in the Piedmont region of North Italy, she was invited
by the Abbe Combe, pastor of Diou, a priest much taken up with
politico-religious prophecies, to settle in the Allier region of France. She
finished a contrived autobiography, wherein she created an extraordinary
childhood enriched with pseudo-mystical wanderings, her own imaginings &
the chimera provided by her correspondents.
Melanie died on December 14, 1904AD, at Altamura, near Bari, Italy.
She is buried beneath a marble column with a bas-relief depiction of Our Lady
welcoming her into heaven.
In spite of her unapproved writings, Melanie was always faithful to her
original account of the apparition and message of La Salette. She demonstrated
this at the Shrine of La Salette during her last visit there September
8-19,1902.
The Church avoided cracking down on her, & made several attempts to
rehabilitate her, all in vain. Finally, after her death, privately published
books containing her errors were placed on the Index of Prohibited Books, in
1915 & 1923.
In making her famous claim, Melanie, apparently unknowingly borrowed it from
the greatest, most vicious, degenerate & satanic enemy of Christ & of
Christianity in the history of the Church — Martin Luder.
This claim has been pounced upon and triumphantly flaunted by various enemies
of the Church ever since, not the least by Michel Colin, a confidence-artist
who opportunistically latched on to the anti-Catholic legacy of Melanie Calvat
in order to found his own schismatic sect, presently broken into two factions,
one of which is led by the heresiarch Gaston Tremblay in Quebec.
Melanie Calvat's 1879
"Revelations" are pure heresy, which flagrantly contradict the Holy
Council of the Vatican held in 1869-1870, which declares quite plainly that it
is the eternal Church tradition that Rome cannot fail & lose the faith.
[See my articles: Romanism; Roman]
These purported messages put forth by Melanie Calvat were certainly not part of
the original message revealed at La Salette, but the result of her subsequently
falling in with unscrupulous people. Again, much of these ideas were picked up
from Protestant Millenarianism.
No one can be Catholic & admit the Melanianist heresy. It is therefore well
& proper that Holy Mother Church had put these Pseudo-LaSalettan heresies,
the Melanianist heresies, on the Index....
There are many who persist in crediting the heresies of Melanianism, despite
being made aware of the prior, & contrary, teachings of the Holy Council of
the Vatican, 1869-70, & of other Ecumenical & General Councils before
that, upon whose teachings, the Council of the Vatican, 1869-70, bases its own
teachings, on this point, upon.
It remains a fact, that if Melanie's forged latter messages are true, then the
Church fell away, not under Roncalli, but, at least, under Pius IX and with the
Council of the Vatican, 1869-70, if not earlier....
There is, in fact, a small group of people, mainly associated with the
Dollingerites or "Old Catholics" who indeed put forth these ideas.
For us, however, who are unashamedly Catholic, such a claim is impious and
unconscionable....
Given these incontestable facts, one is forced to the conclusion that those who
persist in pretending to be "traditionalist Catholics," & yet
credit Melanianism, are either gullible idiots or malicious saboteurs &
infiltrators…. Whichever it is, it does not do them credit, that they credit
that which blasphemes Holy Mother Church....
I can only say that I have nothing but the most utter contempt for anyone who
is either so puerile or so vile as to credit these monstrous blasphemies put
forth by Melanie Calvat in her "latter" messages, in opposition to
the Holy Council of the Vatican, 1869-1870, & in further opposition of the
actions of Holy Mother Church in putting these vile blasphemies on the index in
the early years of the last century.
It is extremely regrettable
to see that despite all the evidence available in the documents of the Church,
many souls still persist in crediting the nonsense put forth by Melanie Calvat.
It is now high time to slay this beast once and for all.
As a test, let us grant that this "prophecy" is right. Therefore, we
are forced to conclude that the Seat of the Pope, the Successor of Peter,
cannot be permanently fixed in Rome, since, at one time in history, Rome will
lose the faith, etc.
Now this basic deduction runs into a huge obstacle in Catholic doctrine. We
have authoritative texts of the Church dating even from the first age of the
Church, wherein it is clearly & imperatively specified that the Bishop of
Rome is always & eternally the Pope!
Take for example, the classic directive of Pope Boniface VIII in his
Bulla Unam Sanctam, issued
in 1302AD:
"We declare, say, define, & pronounce that it is absolutely
necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman
Pontiff."
There are very many more
texts, both before & after this, by Popes, Councils, etc., but I will
use Unam Sanctam as a test case.
If it is true that God revealed that "Rome will lose the Faith &
become the seat of the Antichrist," then He would not have permitted
Boniface to decree as he did. For then, Boniface would have been guided to
decree thusly:
"We declare, say, define, & pronounce that it is absolutely
necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Pope, who will be, for a
long time, the Roman Pontiff, but not always!"
The difficulty of the
case becomes apparent, does it not?
There are far too many statements binding the faithful where the Church has
unambiguously specified the central role of the Roman Pontiff in the Economy of
Salvation. However, if it is true that "Rome will lose the Faith &
become the seat of the Antichrist," then all these statements are either
wrong or defective in that they did not specify as unambiguously as necessary.
This is an important point to understand. The Church is infallibly guided by the
Holy Ghost, who is God, who can neither deceive, nor be deceived. Therefore, if
this message (of Melanie) is correct, then the Church should have, at least
several times, if not at every single mention of the Roman Pontiff, added this
necessary caveat, such as I have, for demonstration, added to the directive of
Boniface VIII....
Some may argue that perhaps the Church already has done this, in some obscure
text. I say that this argument does not hold water. As one pope has mentioned: "The faith is not meant to be known only to those who have
spent their entire lives searching the books, & to have found the final &
comprehensive truth only in their last days. Rather the faith is for all men,
of whatever age & condition."
Therefore, we are forced to either conclude that the Holy Ghost has failed us,
which is impossible, or that the claim of Melanie is wrong & false,
contrary to the Holy Catholic Faith.
Church vs. Revelation?
Given the perversity
that obtains, I fully apprehend that some people may allege that the
Revelations made to Melanie are superior to the Doctrine of the Church, &
supersedes the teachings of the Church.
The teaching authority of the Church has been established by Christ Himself, in
Divine Revelation, & He guarantees it for all time. But, again, there is a
sharp distinction between Public & Private Revelation.
Public Revelation is always & everywhere superior to any Private
Revelation.
Public Revelation is that Revelation that is made unto all men & which all
men are required to accept & follow in order to ensure their eternal
salvation.
Private Revelation, on the other hand, needs to be investigated & certified
as true by the authorities established in Public Revelation — the Teaching
Authority of the Church — & if it contradicts or alters Public Revelation
in any point or question, it gives way to Public Revelation.
Magisterial Texts Up To Pope Pius IX
1. Pope
St. Julius — Letter to the Oriental Churches, 341: "Why was nothing written to us about the Church of
Alexandria? Did you not know that the custom was this: to write to us first, &
thus from here justice would be determined? Therefore, if any such suspicion
fell upon the bishop of Alexandria, the thing to do was to write to this Church
(of Rome)."
2. Pope
St. Innocent I — Letter to the Bishops of Africa, 417: "Following the examples of ancient
tradition... in your pursuit of the things of God,... you have made manifest
your proper course of action, the vitality of your religion... when you agreed
to refer to our judgment. For you knew what was due to the Apostolic See, since
all of us who are here desire to follow the apostle from whom have come this
episcopate & all the authority belong to this name. By following him we
know how to condemn what is wrong & to approve of what is praiseworthy.
Moreover, in safeguarding the ordinances of the Fathers with your priestly
zeal, you certainly believe they must not be trodden under foot. They decreed,
not with human, but with divine, judgment that no decision (even though it
concerned the most remote provinces) was to be considered final unless this See
were to hear of it, so that all the authority of this See might back up
whatever just decision was reached."
3. Pope
St. Boniface I, Letter to Rufus, Bishop of Thessalonica, 422: "...We have sent a letter... to the Synod (at
Corinth) & from this letter all the brethren realize... that Our judgment
is not to be reviewed. For it has never been permitted to go over anything once
it has been decided by the Apostolic See."
4. Pope
St. Hormisdas, Formula for the Acacians, 517. It was ordered by the Emperor
Justinian, the first Catholic Emperor of the East in a long time, that the
Oriental bishops sign the Formula drawn up by Pope St. Hormisdas at his behest
to end the Schism of Acacius, one-time Patriarch of Constantinople. According
to the Formula, these bishops re-recognised the supremacy and authority of the
Apostolic See, i.e., of the Church of Rome and of its Bishop, the Pope.
5. Pope
St. Leo IX, Letter to Michael Caerularius, Patriarch of Constantinople,
1053: "...The holy Church
has been built upon a rock, that is, upon Christ, & upon Peter or Cephas,
the son of John, who was first called Simon. It was so built because it never
was to be conquered by the gates of hell, that is, by heretical opinions which
lead the unwary to destruction. This is the promise of Truth itself who is the
cause of all that is true: 'The gates of hell shall not prevail against it'
(Matt. xvi, 18). The same Son of God bears witness that by His prayers He obtained
the fulfillment of this promise from the Father, for He said to Peter, 'Simon,
Simon, behold, Satan has desired to have you... but I have prayed for thee ,
that thy faith may not fail' (Luke 22:31f). Will there by anyone, then, so
foolish as to dare think that the prayer of the Person whose Will is Power to
do, can be devoid of effect? Is it not by the See of the Prince of the
Apostles, namely, but this Roman Church, both by this same Peter & by his
successors, that all the inventions of heretics stand condemned, exposed, &
overcome? Are not the hearts of the brethren strengthened in the faith of Peter
which has not failed thus far & will not fail till the end of time?"
6. Pope
Gregory X, The Second Council of Lyons, 1274: "The same holy Roman Church also has supreme &
full primacy & jurisdiction over the whole Catholic Church. This it truly &
humbly recognizes as received from the Lord Himself in the person of St. Peter,
the Prince, or head, of the Apostles, whose successor in the fullness of power
is the Roman Pontiff. And just as the holy Roman Church is bound more than all
the others to defend the truth of faith, so, if there arise any questions
concerning the faith, they must be decided by its judgment. Anyone who is
aggrieved may appeal to it in matters pertaining to the ecclesiastical court; &
in all cases that require ecclesiastical investigation, one may have recourse
to its judgment. Also, all churches are subject to it, & their prelates
render it obedience & reverence. There is such a fullness of power vested
in this Church that it admits other churches to a share in its responsibility; &
many of these, especially the patriarchal churches, the same Roman Church has honored
with various privileges. Yet always its special position has remained intact,
both in general councils & in some others."
7. Pope
Boniface VIII - Bulla Unam Sanctam (1302): “We declare, say, define, & pronounce that it
is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject
to the Roman Pontiff."
8. Pope
Leo X - Exsurge Domine Condemnation of the Errors of Luther
(1520):
a. Condemned
Proposition # 25: "The
Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, was not, in the person of St. Peter,
appointed by Christ as his vicar over all the churches of the entire world."
Operation Of Roman Indefectibility
Some will say,
"Whatever the Church taught, Rome has in fact fallen!"
Rome has not.
The Doctrine of Roman Indefectibility does not mean that Romans will not fall.
It merely means that not all Romans will fall. That is, there
will always remain a remnant Church in and of Rome that will not fall.
It may be that most if not nearly all Romans fall away. However, the Citadel of
the Faith will not fall; it will not be destroyed or ruined or occupied by the
enemy. It will stand.
Today, we see, with our eyes, that "Rome has fallen." But we are
obliged to believe, upon the Word of God, that Rome has not; that merely a
great number have, but that Rome withstands, not of itself, but by the Power
and Guarantee of God. This is our Faith. To confess this is to be Catholic.
Like Abraham, we cannot see the physical evidence of God's faithfulness. But we
believe in God, who can neither deceive, nor be deceived. And so we believe: The Church of Rome is Indestructible, & Indefectible!
Caveat: The Non-Case
It is
necessary to state the Caveat that, even though I believe entirely and
absolutely in the Doctrine of Roman Indefectibility, I do not agree with Mr. J.
Lawrence Case's claim that it means that only the Romans can act to supply the
Church the pope.
Such a claim is not evident from a plain consideration of the Doctrine in
itself.
Previously, as I invariably cite, the Councils of Pisa & of Constance were
the results of International efforts to solve a similar crisis in the Church —
the "Great Western Schism" — without insisting first on the right of
the Romans to solve the difficulty & to provide the Universal Church with
its indisputable Supreme Leader....
It may be also be worthwhile to point out that neither Pisa nor Constance were
Councils in the regular sense, in that a Council is invariably a gathering of
the Bishops as a College, in succession of the College of the Apostles.
On the contrary, Pisa & Constance were actually Great Congresses of
Catholics and even of Conciliarists, who were not yet defined formally as
heretics; gargantuam Congresses of laymen, academics, lower clerics & from
all walks of life in the Catholic world of that day!
Lúcio Mascarenhas, Bombay, India,
Secretary for Correspondence to His Holiness Michael I, by the Grace of God,
Pope.
