Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

"Apostolate of Infiltration"

Another subject intimately related with the question of the “common ground” strategy is the so-called "apostolate of infiltration." Let us clarify this notion. As the term shows, "apostolate of infiltration" is a form of proselytism that consists in an apostle stealing into non-Catholic ambiences and working there to conquer souls. A vast number of concrete cases can fit into this theoretical definition. First of all, let us look at the nature of the ambience being infiltrated; second, what reasons are given for the infiltration; and, finally, who is the person assigned to carry out the infiltration. Only after this we will be able to say in which cases this apostolate is licit.

Variety of Ambiences

There are ambiences removed from the thought of the Church in which, nevertheless, evil or error are in a state of relative apathy. This would be the case with scientific, literary, recreational (i.e., a chess club), philatelic associations and so on. The temperament of people usually dedicated to such activities and the very nature of these activities make it highly unlikely they could serve for a militant and contagious action of evil. The same can be said of many work environments like banks, offices, departments etc. The huge amount of work, the all-absorbing attention demanded by business, and the bosses’ morality can eventually create an environment that only marginally, if at all, drags people to evil. However, in this matter one must avoid any enumeration that does not have the character of an example.

Often enough, unfortunately, myriad circumstances can make one such place, typically innocuous in one city, highly harmful in another. Of themselves, however, these ambiences are not bad.

On the other hand, nowadays there are ambiences such that only a naïve person could imagine they are harmless. Such naiveté calls to mind the reproach of Prophet Osee to "a dove that is decoyed." (1) First on this list come all of the typically evil places of entertainment that public morality deems unfit for decent people. Second, the many places of entertainment, perhaps worse than the former, generally called “quasi-family entertainment.” We see them as dens of ignominy. In these places, a housewife rubs shoulders, without blushing, with people whose category should not even be mentioned. Nor is the father, head of the family, ashamed to be there in sight of relatives and friends with company that destroys his prestige and gives his children a very bad example. Everything is mixed up; everything is leveled and confused in a promiscuity that diminishes both the distance and difference that should exist between a home and a brothel. As painful as it may be, let us say the truth: a family that frequents “quasi-family” places lowers itself to a condition of a quasi-family—in other words, a family in ruins. Unfortunately, the limits between family and quasi-family entertainment are becoming more and more blurry and many ambiences harbor under the label of family entertainment, a situation of complete promiscuity. Today, large hotels with dancing, casinos and halls are, for the most part and in the best of cases, quasi-family places.

Unfortunately, this panorama would not be complete if we failed to say that some ambiences frequented exclusively by families are in the same category. In them, leadership in terms of customs, good taste and elegance are so monopolized by persons of an openly scandalous life that evil seems to be surrounded by the splendor that the unlimited resources of money and politeness can place at its service. How many so-called family dances, gatherings and dinners are but ambiences in which everything comes together to lose souls! We do not hesitate to say, without fear of exaggeration, that in certain circles the social life as a whole has been invaded, infected and dominated by this despotism of evil, unquestionably exercised even in the excess of language and intemperance in drinking! The same can be said of certain work ambiences in which excessive familiarity, immoral conversation and pagan behavior, all of it made worse by sexual promiscuity, turn working for a living into a serious risk to one’s eternal salvation.

Having thus described various ambiences in which a person can find himself, we can establish the first principles for any solution.

Plurality of Attitudes

I. According to the masterly doctrine developed by Abbot Chautard in The Soul of the Apostolate, the first concern of anyone who consecrates himself to work in the apostolate must be above all his own sanctification. Now, for the majority of people in our time it is of primordial importance that they frequent Catholic ambiences, that is, that they spend part of their leisure time with their brothers in the Faith, at a center of Catholic Action or any other religious association. And since they are young men, this need is imperative. As we have called to mind, this is the process used by the admirable propaganda machine of totalitarian countries. Thus, whenever the "apostolate of infiltration" even in harmless environments means a considerable sacrifice of this irreplaceable tool of formation, it should be understood that the said "apostolate of infiltration" should not be put into practice.

II. Fortunately, this is not always the case. Sometimes a lay apostle is able to frequent ambiences he is supposed to infiltrate without losing the vital contact he needs to keep with his association. In this case, the "apostolate of infiltration" in harmless ambiences can attain priceless results.

III. The Divine Master asks what does it profit for a man to win the whole world if he loses his own soul. Hence the principle, also approved by any moralist worthy of this name, that in the case "where there is a grave and proximate danger of formal sin, particularly against faith and the angelic virtue, God absolutely wills that a man give up works of charity." (2) In other words, except for the most special case of a duty of state, it would be a mortal sin to expose oneself to a near occasion of mortal sin even if doing so could make a brilliant and promising work of apostolate succeed. There can be no doubt in this regard.

Since for emotionally normal men to frequent clearly non-family and quasi-family ambiences of any kind is a near occasion of sin, it is strictly forbidden for members of Catholic Action to frequent such places.

IV. It is a most grave error to pretend that Catholic Action, by some mysterious grace of state, immunizes its members against temptation. While this grace of state is certainly much more abundant for the clergy, it does not alter the relationship between grace and free will, nor does it smother concupiscence and the devil, which exist for all men. It will not do it for Catholic Action either. To demonstrate this it would suffice to repeat the arguments we developed earlier. (3) These doctrines are erroneous because they presuppose a false panorama.

It is no less erroneous to argue with the example of certain saints of the early centuries of the Church, who are said to have frequented such places to do apostolate. Without discussing the historical fact, we cannot fail to emphasize that if the argument were valid, Canon Law would have erred by forbidding clergy and religious to frequent such ambiences.

V. Someone could argue that placing such a restriction on the freedom of movement of Catholic Action would stymie its fecundity. But Catholic Action is not a game of lottery or roulette in which some souls are exposed so as to gain others. On the other hand, the spectacle of pure and generous youth, triumphing over the seductions of the modern world and trampling all its enchanting attractions underfoot to leave the modern pestilence behind, must necessarily cause a much greater impression on souls with good judgment and balance, upright souls thirsty for virtue: in a word, souls on their way to Jesus. When apostles "camouflaged" as pagans partake in entertainment entirely dissonant with their Faith and indulge in such pleasures, in the end one does not know whether the apostolate is done as an excuse for pleasure, or if pleasure is supposed to be an instrument of apostolate. Positively, it is not by putting on a worldly look that one attracts souls to Our Lord Jesus Christ.

VI. Applying this principle to quasi-family dances, work places dangerous for morality, etc., we reach the conclusion that these ambiences are in themselves a near occasion of sin for persons with a normal sensibility, and should therefore be proscribed.

Arguments in the opposite sense were, or at least could be, presented with a famous text by Leo XIII on the infiltration of Catholics in Roman society. In this text the Holy Father describes the penetration by early Christians into most varied job positions, including the Imperial Curia. Note that this infiltration happened in obligatory workplaces: the Holy Father does not mention faithful Catholics infiltrating orgies of Roman high society.

VII. Finally, as we said, there are places where it is licit to be present because they pose no danger to salvation. This does not mean that Catholic Action has a right to impose on those of its members who gave up all entertainment, even licit, to lead a more saintly life, that they frequent such places. Such members are worthy of great praise and any criticism of them would be a serious inversion of values.

The first reason for this is that Christian perfection, when practiced clearly and without dissimulation is always the most genuine and fruitful form of apostolate.

Secondly, it is certain that the obligation to save souls cannot deprive anyone whatsoever of the most sacred freedom to practice the kind of renunciation that a prudent director deems guided by the Holy Ghost. If on the natural level that life might seem less fruitful, on the supernatural one it will have an efficacy so great it would be difficult to gauge.

VIII. When weighing all these multiple factors, one must not forget that the only criteria to take into account is not that of the greater or lesser risk posed by the place in which one is, but also the law of decency and the duty of good example. Ecclesiastical authorities censure attendance at questionable places, pagan entertainment, etc. Certain classes of the population, more docile to the voice of the Church or more attached to their traditions, are still reluctant to go along with the new customs. They thus expose themselves to the mockery of their acquaintances but also sacrifice by giving up some entertainment. How would those circles react at the news that members of Catholic Action are not only allowed but even should frequent such places and enjoy all entertainment, indulging in everything the hierarchy condemns? The very hierarchy many of them brag about participating in and being mandataries of! And yet these self-proclaimed mandataries act against the intentions of the mandator! So, even if a member of Catholic Action could claim that frequenting certain places does not harm him personally, his own dignity as member of Catholic Action would forbid him to do so.

IX. This does not mean that we do not admit the possibility that one or another member of Catholic Action, in very special and therefore very exceptional cases, previously authorized by his respective assistant and having taken all precautions to avoid any bad example, can carry out some “infiltration” by attending, for example, a meeting of a Communist union or the like. However, if this exceptional event becomes normal, it will spell the ruin of Catholic Action.

X. Let everyone be mindful, above all, that in this matter no one can be his own judge. Hence, he should always seek the advice of a prudent priest. At times even the best formed souls go through long temptations of natural or diabolical origin. These are such as to make dangerous that which for others is normally innocuous. Thus, the good of the apostolate must always be subordinated to the good of one’s interior life, as weighed by prudent priests.

XI. All these reasons would be incomplete if we failed to emphasize that someone may be forced, as a duty of his state, to work in clearly dangerous places or, more rarely, to be present in worldly places. Let us always remember that God gives special strength to those who involuntarily find themselves in this situation. As long as this is happening, the people involved should take advantage of this unexpected situation to do apostolate of infiltration. However, no duty of state could ever oblige anyone to do evil. Let each one consult a wise and prudent priest before judging himself authorized to accept such an exceptional situation. But if the adviser finds that a duty of state really exists, let those souls be at peace and fight courageously to sanctify themselves and those in contact with them. God will give them the strength that would most certainly be lacking in would-be infiltrators driven by hasty zeal rather than a real duty of state.

How to Do "Apostolate of Infiltration"

We could not close this subject without establishing the behavior that members of Catholic Action should follow in the "apostolate of infiltration." Here also, in order to clarify this complex matter as much as possible, it is well to proceed by making a definite enumeration of principles.

I. Many times, the apostolate of infiltration is aimed primarily at exerting a direct action on the people whose group was infiltrated. This is the case, for example, with persons who infiltrate a Communist cell with the purpose of obtaining information, campaign plans, etc. Obviously, such information means much more than the doubtful conquest of some of the Communist leaders there. In this case a Catholic should hide his convictions if he wants to obtain results; and it would be licit to do so as long as he does not reach the extreme of denying the truth, instead of only hiding it.

II. Except for this and other special cases, the member of Catholic Action should not forget that the greatest ornament of the Catholic Church is Our Lord Jesus Christ. So, to refrain from confessing Our Lord publicly and clearly; to veil His Divine Face on the pretext of doing apostolate; to avoid proclaiming that we are Catholic Christians, proud of it and proud of practicing the virtues imposed by the Church, would be to deprive the apostolate of its most effective means of attraction. It would mean renouncing the spreading of the "good odor of Christ," (4) after which generous souls from all geographical and ideological latitudes will always run.

Clearly, therefore, the famous "common ground" tactic cannot be used in the "apostolate of infiltration" in a habitual and methodical way. On the contrary, all we said about this delicate matter in another chapter perfectly applies here.

Deplorable naturalism! Instead of understanding that the success of the apostolate is for the apostle to manifest Jesus Christ, they suppose that it consists in hiding Him. And he who hides or disfigures His doctrine by so-called mitigation, hides Our Lord Jesus Christ.

How different was the attitude of the holy Curé of Ars, named by the Church as the patron saint of parish priests! He developed methods of apostolate that should profoundly influence the orientation of Catholic Action. While his severity might seem excessive to modernists—he even refused absolution for a long time to a peasant woman because she went to a family dance once a year—he attracted souls more than anyone else. Of him, Abbot Chautard could say: "Joannes quidem signum fecit nullum." (5) Without working miracles Saint John the Baptist attracted multitudes. The voice of Saint John Vianney was quite weak to be heard by the multitudes who gathered around him. But if they could not hear him, they could see him, and they would see a monstrance of God. The sight alone captivated and converted those present.

A lawyer was just back from Ars. Asked about what had impressed him the most, he answered: "I have seen God in a man." (6) We cannot understand how a doctrine of life, coming from lips that know how to enunciate it in an entirely supernatural way, can remain sterile with upright souls. In his sermons the holy Curé of Ars did just that. The solution for a fruitless apostle is not to eliminate the truth from one’s lips but to learn, at the feet of the Tabernacle and of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the secret of proclaiming it not only with one’s lips but with one’s whole soul.

III. Of course, persons obliged to live or work in openly hostile ambiences are not obliged to behave likewise as long as they have well-founded reasons to fear being fired or sustain financial loss. The obligation of doing an open and bold apostolate is not applicable to them, except if they are asked to expressly deny the truth.

What to Think of Dances?

We would not consider our task finished without an observation about dances. It is totally obvious and even commonplace that dancing is not an evil in itself. However, concrete circumstances that can arise, make dancing in general a rather serious evil.

 The sweetness of Saint Francis de Sales is very often mentioned—and rightfully so. The advice that the holy Doctor gives about dances is conclusive, and shows how dangerous he found the dances of his time:

I would say to you of balls what physicians say of mushrooms—the best are but unwholesome food.…If you cannot well avoid mixing in such pursuits, go in a careful watchful spirit.… [Dance] but little and seldom…and beware that you do not become over-fond of the amusement….Such idle recreations [like dancing] are generally dangerous, inasmuch as they dissipate the spirit of devotion, weaken our energies, cool our charity, and arouse many evil inclinations in the heart; therefore they should be entered upon with great caution. (7)

How should one dance? Saint Francis de Sales explains it: "with modesty, dignity, and pure intentions." (8) What would the Holy Doctor say about some modern dances, like the "conga," in which the couples make long lines through the hall holding one another, gesturing and yelling like children? Would he find a way to dance the conga with modesty and dignity when that seemed already a problem in regard to the soft, artistic and delicate dances of his time?

Of course not. Many people understand that because Saint Francis de Sales, though with great apprehension and unease, authorized in thesis that people go dance, this authorization should be liberally extended to everyone. Would these persons be careful enough to advise those who dance to have wholesome thoughts during the dance? And would they have the courage of recommending the thoughts Saint Francis de Sales mentions? What are they?

Whilst you were at the ball, there were souls in torment owing to sins committed or instigated under similar circumstances. (2) And at the same time holy and pious men were serving God, singing His praise and contemplating His beauty. How much better was their time spent than yours? (3) Whilst you were dancing, some souls departed this life in bitter anguish, and thousands of men and women were wandering in the streets or lying on their beds of suffering… (4) Our Blessed Lord, His Mother, the Saints and Angels, were watching you, and surely they pitied and lamented over you, seeing your heart occupied and pleased with such unsatisfying trifles. (5) Whilst you are thus engaged, time slips on and death draws nigh. He mocks you, and calls you to join his dance, in which the music is the groaning for past sin, and in which you will make but one step from life to death: this is the true pastime of men, since in it they pass in an instant from time to eternity, either of good or ill. (9)

It is interesting to read in this line the third part of Chapter 33 of the never sufficiently praised Introduction to the Devout Life.

The remarkable Dominican Father Vuillermet, in an interesting monograph about Catholics and the New Dances, from which we take almost all of our quotes about dances, made an important observation valid for any type of dancing:

Frequent and regular dances rarely remain a simple entertainment. On the contrary, as nearly all moralists observe, they become an occasion for meeting and intimacy by people who thus find an easy and seemingly innocuous way to give their passions a food for which they are always hungry. And even when this initial desire does not exist, is it not true that the frequency of these meetings brings about the birth of passion, all the more so because these meetings are long and thus more dangerous? Nowadays people dance with the same partner throughout the party, something that would have been seen before as a gravely improper behavior. And after the initial ceremony wears off and familiarity starts to set in between the young man and his partner, is it not true that modesty begins to weaken? Feelings are no longer examined and, without realizing it, thoughts and desires that would have once caused a rebellion of the conscience begin to take hold in one’s intellect and heart. I consider, therefore that these frequent dances with the same person are extremely dangerous. (10)

After making some more lenient considerations about small, absolutely sporadic and improvised dancing get-togethers in the intimacy of a family, which nevertheless "are still ill-advised in many ways due to their nature," the author concludes:

in theory, dancing is not immoral . . . and can only become so accidentally. But I cannot deny that in practice, the accidental is the most frequent. People who sin because of dancing are incomparably more numerous than those who do not. The reason lies partly in the decrease of Faith, the abandonment of pious exercises and on the other hand loosening of customs, which today allows such undue familiarities in the dance that very seldom does virtue not fail during it. (11)

These words are of 1924. What would the author say of the dances of 1942?

In 1924, Europe suffered from the invasion of certain American dances—which seem so moderate today—and were the object of many condemnations by the hierarchy in France. Cardinal Dubois, the archbishop of Chambéry, and the bishop of Lille condemned the new dances in succession. The Archbishop of Cambrai wrote: “the tango, the fox-trot and other similar dances are immoral entertainment in themselves. They are forbidden by the conscience itself everywhere and always, before the bishops’ condemnations and independently of them." And Benedict XV, in the Encyclical Sacra Prope Diem, says: "Those exotic and barbarous dances recently imported into fashionable circles, one more shocking than the other; one cannot imagine anything more suitable for banishing all the remains of modesty." (12)

Many of these dances came from the lowest classes of the aboriginal peoples of the Western Hemisphere. In his pastoral letter, Bishop Charot says about them:

Soften as much as you wish this barbaric graft, correct its native lack of modesty as well as you can: as soon as it finds a favorable temperament, this scion will recover its fire and its natural violence. It is the virus of pagan flesh penetrating a social organism shaped by seventeen centuries of Christian spirituality and moral dignity. It is more than revolt (of which no Christian century was spared): deep down, by tendency, it is the anarchy of instinct. (13)

What could it be said of modern dances, many of which are obviously imported and adapted from the "bas-fonds" of old pagan dances of American blacks?

As for children's dances, why not reproduce here, confirming what our bishops so eloquently said, the words of Louis Veuillot:

These dances for children are a dazzling show, they say. Yes, they are, for the eyes.

But what a sad scene it is when we listen to the whispering of reason. Eight-year old girls learn about vanity and ostentation; they are already apt in the art of smiling, posing, adopting different attitudes or musical inflexions in the voice. The boys assume different appearances and expressions, on tips from their mothers and put on gentlemanly, pensive or self-important looks; some pretend they are lively or melancholic, depending on what suits them better. Their mothers are there, beaming. But the scene is ugly. One can see that the characters of that miniature dance had been desecrated from their cradle in the flower of their gracious and naïve simplicity. A reasonable person who attended one of these so-called innocent parties said one experiences a strong desire to whip the kids left and right. (14)

To close, let us see what the Curé of Ars, elevated by Holy Mother Church as model for modern pastors, did in this regard.

We have taken the quotations below from the magnificent work by Msgr. H. Convert:

Both the general interest of the fold entrusted to the care of Fr. Vianney, as well as that of certain people more particularly exposed to losing their souls, demanded the suppression of such a pernicious disorder (dances). He reflected on this, and has, ever since, decided to apply to the letter the principles of Moral Theology on occasional and relapsing sinners, with a great kindness but also with an adamant energy that nothing could turn back. Indeed, he denied absolution, even at Easter, to everyone who had danced, even if only once, during the year; and he would keep them away from the sacraments for as long as he ’deemed it likely that they would fall again into their sin.’ They could come to confession and, in fact, most of them continued to come; he encouraged them, exhorted them to change their lives, but he would not absolve them. “If you do not amend your lives, you are condemned!” he would say.

As you can imagine, this behavior gave rise to many complaints. People would openly comment in every which way that the parish priest was not ‘convenient.’ His method was compared with that of his more indulgent colleagues: he was called scrupulous, ingrate (in the local idiom, ingrate means obnoxious and unpleasant). Some people went to confession in the neighboring parishes; he replied they had gone "to fetch a passport to hell.” Speaking among themselves these people accused him saying: “He wants to make us promise things we cannot fulfill; he would like us to be saints and this is not quite possible in the world. He would like us never to set foot in dancing parties and never to frequent nightclubs and games. If all this were necessary we would never fulfill our Easter duties…”  However, “one cannot say that we will never go back to such entertainment, as we do not know what occasions will arise.” To this selfish argumentation, he replied: “The confessor, fooled by your crafty language, gives you absolution and tells you: ‘Behave!’ For my part I tell you that you trampled upon the adorable blood of Jesus Christ and sold out your God like Judas sold Him to his executioners.”

What did the Curé of Ars gain with such a method? Many young men and women were excluded from the sacraments for years. It is true. Could we think, could we say that this was an evil? Had his method been different, they would have received the sacraments without validity or sacrilegiously: they would have joined, as happens only too often, the practices of Christian life with disorders of the heart; the parish would appear to have been converted without being so in reality; the pomps of Satan would always have prestige; and the Prince of darkness would have remained the true master of the situation. But the Curé of Ars wanted Jesus Christ to be the indisputable King of his fold. So he went on war footing for Jesus Christ for more than twenty years, gaining ground from the enemy inch by inch, sacrificing his rest in this battle and temporarily also his reputation, shedding his blood abundantly nearly every day, becoming exhausted from fasting and fatigue. Finally, victory was complete and definitive; piety and virtue were able to flourish freely on this land purified and conquered for its only Master, and to this day we continue to savor its fruits.

Besides, let us say in passing that the Curé of Ars showed firmness not only in regard to dances. “The sinner who would not heed his tender admonitions—-his assistant testified—found him inflexible in keeping the rules” and “was faced with an insurmountable barrier." (15)

The same author adds in a note:

Dances were soon abolished in the parish, though some tried to bring them back every once in a while. They are no longer mentioned from 1832 onward. But young men and women wanted to amuse themselves by going to dance in the neighboring places. It was then, above all that the Saint armed himself with intransigent firmness. (16)

Notes:

1) Osee, 7:11.

2)  Chautard, p. 70.

3) Cf. Part III, chap. 3, “Apostolate of Conquest.”

4) 2 Cor. 2:15.

5) “John performed no sign” (John 10:41).

6) Msgr. H. Convert, Le Saint Curé d'Ars et le Sacrement de Pénitence, (Lyon, Paris: ed. Emmanuel Vitte, 1931), p. 122.

7) St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, p. 215.

8) Ibid.

9) Ibid., pp. 215-216.

10) Fr. Vuillermet, O.P., Os Católicos e as Novas Danças, p.

11) Ibid., p.

12) Benedict XV, Encylical Sacra Propediem, Jan. 6, 1921, no. 19, at www.papalencyclicals.net/Ben15/b15sapro.htm

13) Most Rev. Charost,

14) Louis Veuillot, L'Univers, Dec. 28, 1858.

15) Convert, pp. 18-21.

16) Ibid., p.  fn.

Next

Table of Contents

Prev