Smoke of Satan.

New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

214 pp., $34.95 Can.

REVIEWED BY DAVID DOOLEY

The title of this book is taken from a statement made by Paul VI in 1972: "Satan's smoke has made its way into the temple of God through some crack." Cuneo's use of this provocative comment, however, is open to question, as his subtitle makes clear: "Conservative and traditionalist dissent in contemporary American Catholicism." Are the eyes of conservatives and traditionalists obscured by Satan's smoke, and can their positions be legitimately given the label of dissent?

The book is the product of extensive interviews and research - testified to by the voluminous and very useful notes at the back - and Cuneo's discussions of the various forms of dissent he deals with are interesting, perceptive, and for the most part right on the mark. In what he refers to as the Catholic underground, he distinguishes three categories: Catholic conservatives, Catholic separatists, and Catholic Marianists. As one would expect, the followers of Archbishop Lefebvre who form the Society of St. Pius X fall into the second category; but some of the other groups examined are even more extreme, such as the community of Mount St. Michael in the Pacific Northwest, characterised by "a peculiar blend of Catholic survivalism, paranoia, and lockstep dogmatism," and Quebec's Apostles of Infinite Love, headed by the self-styled Pope Gregory XVII.

Central problem

Here we get to the central problem with this book. Pope Gregory XVII's Apostles of Infinite Love, if Catholic at all, certainly belong to the unCatholic underground; but orthodox Catholics do not. They are not conspiratorial, and their publications are not samizdat; the proliferation of high-quality magazines, such as First Things, Crisis, New Oxford Review (and don't forget Catholic Insight), to name only a few, is a very important recent phenomenon, and Cuneo ignores their existence.

In his earlier examination of the pro-life movement in Toronto, Catholics against the Church (1989), Cuneo made the same mistake. The title refers to those who support the Church's Magisterium and the Catholic view of abortion, persons no more against the Church than the Holy Father himself. But because they seem to be a minority in the Church today, he sees them as singular, odd and on the way out. Cuneo's 1989 book contained a great deal of value, such as his explanations of how and why bishops and "social justice" Catholics have never been strong supporters of the pro-life movement, but when he called faithful Catholics "revivalists," as though they were the type of people who shouted "Hallelujah" at prayer meetings, he was guilty of employing a very inaccurate caricature.

In Catholics Against the Church, Cuneo cited the opinion of one prominent theologian (not named) that the anti-abortion activists did not deserve to be written about at all. "Basically they're fascists simply intent on controlling people's lives. I'm appalled that you would even consider doing a study of them." The speaker, I am fairly sure, was a former colleague of mine, now a dissenting former priest; at any rate, the opinion of anyone capable of making such an outrageous and irresponsible statement does not deserve to be given any credence. Cuneo did write his study of anti-abortion protesters, but still he gives the impression of having listened too much to people like this man and of taking their extreme position as a standard by which to measure the behaviour of faithful Catholics. It is theologians like this dissident priest who have the smoke of Satan in their eyes and, regrettably, Cuneo does not see it.