By Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
I believed yesterday I said here – if not I will do it in two words – that with the Revolution, iniquity and evil became much more refined; and that after the immense sin, evil became much worse than it was before that sin. And that, for this reason, that occasion already required the existence of knights much more knightly than at the time of Roland.
Now, why did evil refine itself? Was it because it had more valiant fighters and more competent generals at its service?
This is something that can be discussed. I don’t believe it had more valiant fighters, but probably more competent generals; because just as the whole culture and civilization gradually developed in time, so did military art. We can conclude that military art grew a lot. But chivalry did not.
What is a knight? It is a Catholic warrior in the splendor of his virtue, in the splendor of his whole capacity etc.: this is the true knight.
So, the first point is: the knights disappeared.
Second point, warfare was transformed. The Revolution works much more on people’s minds than through bullets; it does much more by rotting people’s characters than by conquering with bullets. For example, the revolutionary evil wreaked by television in one single evening is incomparably worse than the damage a whole crusader army could do!
On the other hand, it’s no use repressing television by force, because they will make another, clandestine type of television, this will rise again. In other words, one needs to win the battles of the spirit.
And the battles of the spirit require fighters in this struggle to have all the finesse, penetration, prophetic spirit and grit to fight and win this spiritual combat! But this supposes much greater dedication and much more self-giving than a regular warrior must have. Because a warrior goes to war, returns from war, lies in bed and waits for another battle.
Not here. Night and day, night and day…
A man goes to the store to buy a small box of paper clips to put on his desk. The clips on offer may have a certain revolutionary influence. He must refuse them. He goes to another store to buy a pair of shoes; he has to make sure they are not revolutionary. A person goes by and greets him: he has to see whether that greeting was not revolutionary. He must be able to see the meaning of Revolution in everything in order to perceive and reject the Revolution in everything. Because, if he does not do that, the Revolution enters and takes over the situation.
So, the 21st century knight, that is, the man of the Counter-Revolution in the 21st century – not in the 20th – has to be a man profoundly imbued with this spirit; has to have an unparalleled dedication to the counter-revolutionary cause; and he needs to see the Revolution and the Counter-Revolution at every moment and on every occasion. This has to be that way, there is no way out.
If he fails to do this, he can say what he wants; but when he appears before God he will have left behind him all the open doors through which the Revolution entered.
Take, for example, the case of a father – as will happen in the Reign of Mary – with nine or ten children, a common fact. If he does not infuse this spirit in all his children, what grandchildren will he leave? And if a father slacks off, his son might become a colossus of the Revolution. How is he going to account for that? So you perceive that this supposes a penetration, a perspicacity of soul, a dedication and combativeness even greater than the warrior’s.
(Excerpt from a Tea, Monday, Sept. 11, 1989 – Nobility.org translation)