Bergoglio's heretical views oppose Pope St. Pius X's Magisterium

  "The true friends of the people are neither the revolutionaries nor the innovators. They are the traditionalists." 

Letter on the Sillon, August 25, 1910

St. Pius X judges Bergoglio's heretical opinions.

…judges Francis’ idea on union in the Catholic Church

• All minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality

If, as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on the role of the Church

• Apostasy from God is a terrible and deep-rooted malady affecting human society today

Then again, to omit other motives, We were terrified beyond all else by the disastrous state of human society today. For who can fail to see that society is at the present time, more than in any past age, suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction? You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is – apostasy from God, than which in truth nothing is more allied with ruin, according to the word of the Prophet: “For behold they that go far from Thee shall perish” (Ps 72:17). We saw therefore that, in virtue of the ministry of the Pontificate, which was to be entrusted to Us, We must hasten to find a remedy for this great evil, considering as addressed to Us that Divine command: “Lo, I have set thee this day over the nations and over kingdoms, to root up, and to pull down, and to waste, and to destroy, and to build, and to plant” (Jer 1:10). But, cognizant of Our weakness, We recoiled in terror from a task as urgent as it is arduous. (Pius X. Encyclical E supremi apostolatus, no. 3, October 4, 1903)

• There is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity

The same applies to the notion of Fraternity which they found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting. […] there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, no 22–23, August 15, 1910)

• The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts forever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times

You see clearly, Venerable Brethren, how mistaken are those who think they are doing service to the Church, and producing fruit for the salvation of souls, when by a kind of prudence of the flesh […] under the fatal illusion that they are thus able more easily to win over those in error, but really with the continual danger of being themselves lost. The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts for ever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. “Jesus Christ, today and yesterday, and the same for ever” (Heb 13:8). (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 25–26, March 21, 1904)

…judges Francis’ idea on the use of internet for catholic education

• There are Christians who live rashly and imprudently with regard to religion

It is a common complaint, unfortunately too well founded, that there are large numbers of Christians in our own time who are entirely ignorant of those truths necessary for salvation. And when we mention Christians, We refer not only to the masses or to those in the lower walks of life – for these find some excuse for their ignorance in the fact that the demands of their harsh employers hardly leave them time to take care of themselves or of their dear ones – but We refer to those especially who do not lack culture or talents and, indeed, are possessed of abundant knowledge regarding things of the world but live rashly and imprudently with regard to religion. It is hard to find words to describe how profound is the darkness in which they are engulfed and, what is most deplorable of all, how tranquilly they repose there. (Pius X. Acerbo nimis, no. 2, April 15, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea on if doctrine can be interpreted against the infallible Magisterium

• Disordered by the stain of the first sin, human will cannot be upright nor the conduct good without the true doctrine of Jesus Christ

Disordered by the stain of the first sin, and almost forgetful of God, its Author, it improperly turns every affection to a love of vanity and deceit. This erring will, blinded by its own evil desires, has need therefore of a guide to lead it back to the paths of justice whence it has so unfortunately strayed. The intellect itself is this guide, which need not be sought elsewhere, but is provided by nature itself. It is a guide, though, that, if it lack its companion light, the knowledge of divine things, will be only an instance of the blind leading the blind so that both will fall into the pit. […] The truly remarkable dignity of man as the son of the heavenly Father, in Whose image he is formed, and with Whom he is destined to live in eternal happiness, is also revealed only by the doctrine of Jesus Christ. […] We do maintain that the will cannot be upright nor the conduct good when the mind is shrouded in the darkness of crass ignorance. A man who walks with open eyes may, indeed, turn aside from the right path, but a blind man is in much more imminent danger of wandering away. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 3–5, April 15, 1905)

• The Pope’s mission is to watch over the purity of the Faith and the integrity of Catholic discipline, and protect the faithful from evil and error

Our Apostolic Mandate requires from Us that We watch over the purity of the Faith and the integrity of Catholic discipline. It requires from Us that We protect the faithful from evil and error; especially so when evil and error are presented in dynamic language which, concealing vague notions and ambiguous expressions with emotional and high-sounding words, is likely to set ablaze the hearts of men in pursuit of ideals which, whilst attractive, are nonetheless nefarious. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, no. 1, August 23, 1910)

• Far, far from the clergy be the love of novelty!

Equal diligence and severity are to be used in examining and selecting candidates for Holy Orders. Far, far from the clergy be the love of novelty! God hates the proud and the obstinate. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 49, September 8, 1907)

• It is the Pope’s duty to guard, with the greatest vigilance, the Deposit of the Faith, rejecting the profane novelties

The office divinely committed to Us of feeding the Lord’s flock has especially this duty assigned to it by Christ, namely, to guard with the greatest vigilance the deposit of the faith delivered to the saints, rejecting the profane novelties of words and oppositions of knowledge falsely so called. There has never been a time when this watchfulness of the supreme pastor was not necessary to the Catholic body; for, owing to the efforts of the enemy of the human race, there have never been lacking “men speaking perverse things” (Acts 20:30), “vain talkers and seducers” (Tit. 1:10), “erring and driving into error” (2 Tim. 3:13) […] Blind that they are, and leaders of the blind, inflated with a boastful science, they have reached that pitch of folly where they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true nature of the religious sentiment; with that new system of theirs they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, condemned by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can rest and maintain truth itself. […] But for Catholics the second Council of Nicea will always have the force of law, where it condemns those who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical traditions, to invent novelties of some kind . . . or endeavour by malice or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 1.11.42, September 8, 1907)

• The truth is one, it lasts forever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times

You see clearly, Venerable Brethren, how mistaken are those who think they are doing service to the Church, and producing fruit for the salvation of souls, when by a kind of prudence of the flesh […] under the fatal illusion that they are thus able more easily to win over those in error, but really with the continual danger of being themselves lost. The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts forever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. “Jesus Christ, today and yesterday, and the same forever” (Heb 13:8). (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 25, March 12, 1904)

• Modernists teach that ecclesiastical Magisterium is subordinate to individual consciences and must bend to their impulses as ‘necessary evolutions’

This is their conception of the magisterium of the Church: No religious society, they say, can be a real unit unless the religious conscience of its members be one, and one also the formula which they adopt. But his double unity requires a kind of common mind whose office is to find and determine the formula that corresponds best with the common conscience, and it must have moreover an authority sufficient to enable it to impose on the community the formula which has been decided upon. From the combination and, as it were fusion of these two elements, the common mind which draws up the formula and the authority which imposes it, arises, according to the Modernists, the notion of the ecclesiastical magisterium. And as this magisterium springs, in its last analysis, from the individual consciences and possesses its mandate of public utility for their benefit, it follows that the ecclesiastical magisterium must be subordinate to them, and should therefore take democratic forms. To prevent individual consciences from revealing freely and openly the impulses they feel, to hinder criticism from impelling dogmas towards their necessary evolutions – this is not a legitimate use but an abuse of a power given for the public utility. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 25, September 8, 1907)

• Modernists affirm that the Church should submit to the laws of evolution, accommodating itself to historical conditions and existing forms of society

First of all they lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything is subject to change, and must change, and in this way they pass to what may be said to be, among the chief of their doctrines, that of Evolution. To the laws of evolution everything is subject – dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death. […] The chief stimulus of evolution in the domain of worship consists in the need of adapting itself to the uses and customs of peoples, as well as the need of availing itself of the value which certain acts have acquired by long usage. Finally, evolution in the Church itself is fed by the need of accommodating itself to historical conditions and of harmonising itself with existing forms of society. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 26, September 8, 1907)

• Modernists affirm that changes and advances take place by a compromise between authority and individual consciences

Hence, studying more closely the ideas of the Modernists, evolution is described as resulting from the conflict of two forces, one of them tending towards progress, the other towards conservation. The conserving force in the Church is tradition, and tradition is represented by religious authority, and this both by right and in fact; for by right it is in the very nature of authority to protect tradition, and, in fact, for authority, raised as it is above the contingencies of life, feels hardly, or not at all, the spurs of progress. The progressive force, on the contrary, which responds to the inner needs lies in the individual consciences and ferments there – especially in such of them as are in most intimate contact with life. […] Now it is by a species of compromise between the forces of conservation and of progress, that is to say between authority and individual consciences, that changes and advances take place. The individual consciences of some of them act on the collective conscience, which brings pressure to bear on the depositaries of authority, until the latter consent to a compromise, and, the pact being made, authority sees to its maintenance. With all this in mind, one understands how it is that the Modernists express astonishment when they are reprimanded or punished. What is imputed to them as a fault they regard as a sacred duty. Being in intimate contact with consciences they know better than anybody else, and certainly better than the ecclesiastical authority, what needs exist – nay, they embody them, so to speak, in themselves. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 27, September 8, 1907)

• For the Modernists, there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church

For the Modernists, both as authors and propagandists, there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church. Nor indeed are they without precursors in their doctrines, for it was of these that Our Predecessor Pius IX wrote: “These enemies of divine revelation extol human progress to the skies, and with rash and sacrilegious daring would have it introduced into the Catholic religion as if this religion were not the work of God but of man, or some kind of philosophical discovery susceptible of perfection by human efforts.” […] we find it condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX., where it is enunciated in these terms: “Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the progress of human reason; and condemned still more solemnly in the Vatican Council: The doctrine of the faith which God has revealed has not been proposed to human intelligences to be perfected by them as if it were a philosophical system, but as a divine deposit entrusted to the Spouse of Christ to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence the sense, too, of the sacred dogmas is that which our Holy Mother the Church has once declared, nor is this sense ever to be abandoned on plea or pretext of a more profound comprehension of the truth. Nor is the development of our knowledge, even concerning the faith, impeded by this pronouncement – on the contrary it is aided and promoted. For the same Council continues: Let intelligence and science and wisdom, therefore, increase and progress abundantly and vigorously in individuals and in the mass, in the believer and in the whole Church, throughout the ages and the centuries – but only in its own kind, that is, according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same acceptation.” (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 28, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea that preaching the Gospel does not entail doctrinal and moral principles

• The first duty of all those who are entrusted in any way with the government of the Church is to instruct the faithful in the things of God

We must now consider upon whom rests the obligation to dissipate this most pernicious ignorance [of religion] and to impart in its stead the knowledge that is wholly indispensable. There can be no doubt, Venerable Brethren, that this most important duty rests upon all who are pastors of souls. On them, by command of Christ, rest the obligations of knowing and of feeding the flocks committed to their care; and to feed implies, first of all, to teach. “I will give you pastors according to my own heart,” God promised through Jeremias, “and they shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine” (Jer 3:15). […] the first duty of all those who are entrusted in any way with the government of the Church is to instruct the faithful in the things of God. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 7, April 15, 1905)

• Those who teach in the Church should earnestly exhort all to dread and avoid vice and to practice virtue

The task of the catechist is to take up one or other of the truths of faith or of Christian morality and then explain it in all its parts; and since amendment of life is the chief aim of his instruction, the catechist must needs make a comparison between what God commands us to do and what is our actual conduct. After this, he will use examples appropriately taken from the Holy Scriptures, Church history, and the lives of the saints – thus moving his hearers and clearly pointing out to them how they are to regulate their own conduct. He should, in conclusion, earnestly exhort all present to dread and avoid vice and to practice virtue. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 13, April 15, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea on the Church’s rules on matrimony being ‘overly rigid’

• Liberal concessions and prudence of the flesh under the fatal illusion that one can win over those in error, is to participate in their continual danger of being lost

You see clearly, Venerable Brethren, how mistaken are those who think they are doing service to the Church, and producing fruit for the salvation of souls, when by a kind of prudence of the flesh they show themselves liberal in concessions to science falsely so called, under the fatal illusion that they are thus able more easily to win over those in error, but really with the continual danger of being themselves lost. The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts for ever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. ‘Jesus Christ, today and yesterday, and the same for ever’ (Heb 13:8). (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 25, March 12, 1904)

• The primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, but in zeal for moral improvement

But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. (Pius X. Enyclical Notre charge apostolique, no. 22, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on zeal for the liturgy, doctrine and prestige of the Church

• It behooves us to cry aloud and make known the great truths of the faith

In the midst of these public calamities it behooves us to cry aloud and make known the great truths of the faith not only to the people, to the humble, the afflicted, but to the powerful and the rich, to them that decide and govern the policy of nations, to make known to all the great truths which history confirms by its great and disastrous lessons […] (Pius X. Encyclical Communium rerum, no. 24, April 21, 1909)

…judges Francis’ idea on the role of women in the Church

• The Church, a society comprising two categories: Pastors and flock

It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful. So distinct are these categories that with the pastoral body only rests the necessary right and authority for promoting the end of the society and directing all its members towards that end; the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors. (Pius X. Encyclical Vehementer nos, February 11, 1906)

• Modernist ‘reformers’ insist that authority should be decentralized in the Church

It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. […] Ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic parts. Its spirit with the public conscience, which is not wholly for democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy, and even to the laity, and authority should be decentralised. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 38, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ attitude towards public sinners, changing Vatican protocol

• Jesus’ heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will but also holy indignation against the profaners

True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. […] These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one’s personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism. (Saint Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, August 15, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on conversion of the papacy

• The pilot of the ship of the Church raised up by God had a strong hand saving the vessel from future storms

Gregory himself calls the Church of Rome: ‘An old ship woefully shattered; for the waters are entering on all sides, and the joints, buffeted by the daily stress of the storm, are growing rotten and herald shipwreck’ (Registrum i., 4 ad Joannem episcop. Constantino). But the pilot raised up by God had a strong hand, and when placed at the helm succeeding not only in making the port in despite of the raging seas, but in saving the vessel from future storms. (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 2, March 12, 1904)

…judges Francis’ idea on confession

• We exercise the priestly ministry not in our own name, but in the name of Jesus Christ

These truths are all the more evident inasmuch as we exercise the priestly ministry not in our own name, but in the name of Jesus Christ. The Apostle said: Let man so consider us as the ministers of Christ and the dispensers of the mysteries of God; for Christ, therefore, we are ambassadors. This is the reason that Christ has numbered us not among his servants but as his friends. (Pius X. Apostolic Exhortation Haerent animo, no. 4, August 4, 1908)

…judges Francis’ idea on switching Christ for interconfessionalism

• Pastors must avoid seeking cowardly neutrality made up of weak schemes and compromises to the injury of divine and human rights

It is for you, therefore, venerable brethren, whom Divine Providence has constituted to be the pastors and leaders of the Christian people, to resist with all your strength this most fatal tendency of modern society to lull itself in a shameful indolence while war is being waged against religion, seeking a cowardly neutrality made up of weak schemes and compromises to the injury of divine and human rights, to the oblivion of Christ’s clear sentence: ‘He that is not with me is against me’ (Mt 12:30). (Pius X. Encyclical Communium rerum, no. 31, April 21, 1909)

• The duty that has been imposed upon bishops of bringing back human society to the discipline of the Church…

You see, then, Venerable Brethren, the duty that has been imposed alike upon Us and upon you of bringing back to the discipline of the Church human society, now estranged from the wisdom of Christ; the Church will then subject it to Christ, and Christ to God. If We, through the goodness of God Himself, bring this task to a happy issue, We shall be rejoiced to see evil giving place to good, and hear, for our gladness, ‘a loud voice from heaven saying: Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God and the power of his Christ’ (Rev 12:10). (Pius X. Encyclical E supremi apostolati, no. 9, October 4, 1903)

…judges Francis’ idea on the Church called to dialogue

• Those who conceal certain fundamental maxims of the Gospel out of fear are seriously mistaken

You see clearly, Venerable Brethren, how mistaken are those who think they are doing service to the Church, and producing fruit for the salvation of souls, when by a kind of prudence of the flesh […] under the fatal illusion that they are thus able more easily to win over those in error, but really with the continual danger of being themselves lost. The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts forever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. ‘Jesus Christ, today and yesterday, and the same forever’ (Heb 13:8). And so too are all they seriously mistaken who, occupying themselves with the welfare of the people, and especially upholding the cause of the lower classes, seek to promote above all else the material well-being of the body and of life, but are utterly silent about their spiritual welfare and the very serious duties which their profession as Christians enjoins upon them. They are not ashamed to conceal sometimes, as though with a veil, certain fundamental maxims of the Gospel, for fear lest otherwise the people refuse to hear and follow them. It will certainly be the part of prudence to proceed gradually in laying down the truth, when one has to do with men completely strangers to us and completely separated from God. (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 25–26, March 12, 1904)

• Preaching that ignores the spiritual obligations of our faith is harmful

Another way to do harm is that of those who speak of religious matters as if they were to be considered according to the norms and convenience of this passing life, forgetting the eternal life to come: they speak brilliantly of the benefits that the Christian religion has bequeathed to humanity, but not of the obligations it demands; they preach the charity of Jesus Christ our Savior, but say nothing of his justice. The fruit that such preaching produces is insignificant, because any worldling who hears it becomes convinced that he is a good Christian, and that he has no need to change his life, as long as he says: I believe in Jesus Christ. What kind of fruits do such preachers expect to reap? They certainly have no intention other than that of gaining at any cost the favor of their listeners, flattering them, and, as long as they see the church full, they do not care if the souls of the faithful remain empty. (Pius X. Motu Proprio Sacrorum Antistitum, September 1, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on the Church’s fault for the Anglican schism

• All minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth

Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged. […] If, as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, no. 22–23, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on Faith

• For modernists, the dogmas of the faith are an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind prepared for itself by a laborious effort

[Condemned doctrine] The dogmas which the Church professes as revealed are not truths fallen from heaven, but they are a kind of interpretation of religious facts, which the human mind by a laborious effort prepared for itself. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3422. Pius X, Decree of the Holy Office, Lamentabili, July 3, 1907)

• Faith is not a blind religious feeling bursting forth from the recesses of the subconscious and the impulse of the will

I hold most certainly and profess sincerely that faith is not a blind religious feeling bursting forth from the recesses of the subconscious, unformed morally under the pressure of the heart and the impulse of the will, but the true assent of the intellect to the truth received extrinsically ex auditu, whereby we believe that what has been said, attested, and revealed by the personal God, our Creator and Lord, to be true on account of the authority of God the highest truth. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3542. Pius X, Motu proprio, Sacrorum antistitum, September 1, 1901)

• The modernist error denies all external revelation: faith consists in a human sentiment

Religion, whether natural or supernatural, must, like every other fact, admit of some explanation. But when Natural theology has been destroyed, the road to revelation closed through the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. Hence the principle of religious immanence is formulated. […] Therefore, since God is the object of religion, we must conclude that faith, which is the basis and the foundation of all religion, consists in a sentiment which originates from a need of the divine. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, no. 7, September 8, 1907)

• It is this religious sentiment to which Modernists give the name of faith, which they consider the beginning of religion

Should anyone ask how it is that this need of the divine which man experiences within himself grows up into a religion, the Modernists reply thus: Science and history, they say, are confined within two limits, the one external, namely, the visible world, the other internal, which is consciousness. When one or other of these boundaries has been reached, there can be no further progress, for beyond is the unknowable. In presence of this unknowable, whether it is outside man and beyond the visible world of nature, or lies hidden within in the subconsciousness, the need of the divine, according to the principles of Fideism, excites in a soul with a propensity towards religion a certain special sentiment, without any previous advertence of the mind: and this sentiment possesses, implied within itself both as its own object and as its intrinsic cause, the reality of the divine, and in a way unites man with God. It is this sentiment to which Modernists give the name of faith, and this it is which they consider the beginning of religion. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, no. 7, September 8, 1907)

• The Modernists erect religious consciousness as the universal rule on an equal footing with Revelation

But we have not yet come to the end of their philosophy, or, to speak more accurately, their folly. For Modernism finds in this sentiment not faith only, but with and in faith, as they understand it, revelation, they say, abides. For what more can one require for revelation? Is not that religious sentiment which is perceptible in the consciousness revelation, or at least the beginning of revelation? Nay, is not God Himself, as He manifests Himself to the soul, indistinctly it is true, in this same religious sense, revelation? And they add: Since God is both the object and the cause of faith, this revelation is at the same time of God and from God; that is, God is both the revealer and the revealed. Hence, Venerable Brethren, springs that ridiculous proposition of the Modernists, that every religion, according to the different aspect under which it is viewed, must be considered as both natural and supernatural. Hence it is that they make consciousness and revelation synonymous. Hence the law, according to which religious consciousness is given as the universal rule, to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and to which all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church, whether in its teaching capacity, or in that of legislator in the province of sacred liturgy or discipline. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, no. 8-9, September 8, 1907)

• The Modernists lay the axe to the very root of the Church: to the faith and its deepest fibres

Though they express astonishment themselves, no one can justly be surprised that We number such men among the enemies of the Church, if, leaving out of consideration the internal disposition of soul, of which God alone is the judge, he is acquainted with their tenets, their manner of speech, their conduct. Nor indeed will he err in accounting them the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church. For as We have said, they put their designs for her ruin into operation not from without but from within; hence, the danger is present almost in the very veins and heart of the Church, whose injury is the more certain, the more intimate is their knowledge of her. Moreover they lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fibres. And having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to disseminate poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic truth from which they hold their hand, none that they do not strive to corrupt. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, no. 3, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on Catholic Faith and Luteran belief

• …and all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth

Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged. […] If, as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, no. 22 – 23, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on God’s love for sinners

• Those who use merely complacent language harm their brothers

Another way to do harm is that of those who speak of religious matters as if they were to be

considered according to the norms and convenience of this passing life, forgetting the eternal life to come: they speak brilliantly of the benefits that the Christian religion has bequeathed to humanity, but not of the obligations it demands; they preach the charity of Jesus Christ our Savior, but say nothing of his justice. The fruit that such preaching produces is insignificant, because any worldling who hears it becomes convinced that he is a good Christian, and that he has no need to change his life, as long as he says: I believe in Jesus Christ. What kind of fruits do such preachers expect to reap? They certainly have no intention other than that of gaining at any cost the favor of their listeners, flattering them, and, as long as they see the church full, they do not care if the souls of the faithful remain empty. Consequently, they do not even mention sin, the four last things, or any other important topic. Rather, to obtain acclaim and applause, they use complacent language, with eloquence more fitting for worldly speeches than an apostolic and sacred sermon. Against such preachers, Saint Jerome wrote (Ad Nep.): ‘When you teach in the church, you should not provoke the acclamation of the congregation, but rather, compunction: may the tears of your listeners be your praise.’ (Pius X. Motu proprio Sacrorum antistitum, September 1, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on proclaiming the Gospel only with gentleness

• The truth is one, it lasts forever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times

When by a kind of prudence of the flesh they show themselves liberal in concessions to science falsely so-called, under the fatal illusion that they are thus able more easily to win over those in error, but really with the continual danger of being themselves lost. The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts forever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. ‘Jesus Christ, today and yesterday, and the same forever’ (Heb 13:8). And so too are all they seriously mistaken who, occupying themselves with the welfare of the people, and especially upholding the cause of the lower classes, seek to promote above all else the material well-being of the body and of life, but are utterly silent about their spiritual welfare and the very serious duties which their profession as Christians enjoins upon them. They are not ashamed to conceal sometimes, as though with a veil, certain fundamental maxims of the Gospel, for fear lest otherwise the people refuse to hear and follow them. (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 25 – 26, March 12, 1904)

• The use of merely complacent language harms the faithful

Another way to do harm is that of those who speak regarding religious matters as if they were to be considered according to the norms and convenience of this passing life, forgetting the eternal life to come: they speak brilliantly of the benefits that the Christian religion has bequeathed to humanity, but not of the obligations it demands; they preach the charity of Jesus Christ our Savior, but say nothing of his justice. The fruit that such preaching produces is insignificant, because any worldling who hears it becomes convinced that he is a good Christian, and that he has no need to change his life, as long as he says: I believe in Jesus Christ. What kind of fruits do such preachers expect to reap? They certainly have no intention other than that of gaining at any cost the favor of their listeners, flattering them, and, as long as they see the church full, they do not care if the souls of the faithful remain empty. Consequently, they do not even mention sin, the four last things, or any other important topic. Rather, to obtain acclaim and applause, they use complacent language, with eloquence more fitting for worldly speeches than an apostolic and sacred sermon. Against such preachers, Saint Jerome wrote (Ad Nep.): ‘When you teach in the church, you should not merely provoke the acclamation of the congregation, but rather, compunction: may the tears of your listeners be your praise.’ (Pius X. Motu proprio Sacrorum antistitum, September 1, 1910)

• The primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas

But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, August 23, 1910)

• Jesus did not respect the false ideas of sinners, however sincere they might have appeared

Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on proclaiming the Gospel

• Whilst Jesus was kind to sinners he did not respect their false ideas – mercy does not mean an accord with sin

As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. […] Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, no. 38, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on the pastor

• The necessity of the cultivation of the virtues which lead to personal sanctification

We must now consider what is the nature of this sanctity, which the priest cannot lack without being culpable; ignorance or misunderstanding of it leaves one exposed to grave peril. There are some who think, and even declare openly, that the true measure of the merits of a priest is his dedication to the service of others; consequently, with an almost complete disregard for the cultivation of the virtues which lead to the personal sanctification of the priest (these they describe as passive virtues), they assert that all his energies and fervor should be directed to the development and practice of what they call the active virtues. One can only be astonished by this gravely erroneous and pernicious teaching. Our predecessor of happy memory in his wisdom spoke as follows of this teaching: (Letter Testem Benevolentiae to the Archbishop of Baltimore (January 22, 1899). To maintain that some christian virtues are more suited to one period than to another is to forget the words of the Apostle: Those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. (Rom 8:29) Christ is the teacher and the model of all sanctity; all who desire to take their place in the abode of the blessed must adapt their conduct to the standard which he has laid down. (Pius X. Apostolic exhortation Haerent animo, no. 11, August 4, 1908)

• Produce fruit for the salvation of souls without liberal concessions

Now since all this springs necessarily both from the nature of the principles of Christian revelation, and from the intrinsic properties which Our Apostolate should have, you see clearly, Venerable Brethren, how mistaken are those who think they are doing service to the Church, and producing fruit for the salvation of souls, when by a kind of prudence of the flesh they show themselves liberal in concessions to science falsely so called, under the fatal illusion that they are thus able more easily to win over those in error, but really with the continual danger of being themselves lost. The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts for ever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. Jesus Christ, today and yesterday, and the same for ever (Heb 13:8). (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 25, March 12, 1904)

…judges Francis’ idea on new forms of poverty

• The primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas

The same applies to the notion of fraternity which they found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting. […] No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, no. 22-23, August 15, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on the ‘Bread of Life’

• Christ often pointed out the necessity of frequently eating His Flesh and drinking His Blood

This wish of the Council fully conforms to that desire wherewith Christ our Lord was inflamed when He instituted this Divine Sacrament. For He Himself, more than once, and in clarity of word, pointed out the necessity of frequently eating His Flesh and drinking His Blood, especially in these words: ‘This is the bread that has come down from heaven; not as your fathers ate the manna, and died. He who eats this bread shall live forever’ (Jn 6:59). From this comparison of the Food of angels with bread and with manna, it was easily to be understood by His disciples that, as the body is daily nourished with bread, and as the Hebrews were daily fed with manna in the desert, so the Christian soul might daily partake of this heavenly bread and be refreshed thereby. Moreover, we are bidden in the Lord’s Prayer to ask for ‘our daily bread’ by which words, the holy Fathers of the Church all but unanimously teach, must be understood not so much that material bread which is the support of the body as the Eucharistic bread which ought to be our daily food. (Pius X. Decree Sacra Tridentina, December 20, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea that Jesus is only mercy

• The true priest never swerves from the perfection of righteousness

The picture of the true priest, as Gregory understands and describes him, is the man ‘who, dying to all passions of the flesh, already lives spiritually; who has no thought for the prosperity of the world; who has no fear of adversity; who desires only internal things; who does not permit himself to desire what belongs to others but is liberal of his own; who is all bowels of compassion and inclines to forgiveness, but in forgiveness never swerves unduly from the perfection of righteousness; who never commits unlawful actions, but deplores as though they were his own the unlawful actions of others. (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda Sane, no. 29, March 12, 1904)

…judges Francis’ idea on private property

The teachings of Leo XIII regarding the social question synthesized by Pope Pius X. In the Motu proprio Fin dalla prima (The ‘social Sillabus’)

• Just as a body human society is composed by unequal members

I – Human society, as it was established by God, is composed of unequal elements, just as unequal as are the different parts of the human body; to make them all equal is impossible, and would mean the destruction of human society (Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris).

• The equality existing among the various social members consists in all being creatures of God and subject to judgment, reward or punishment

II – The equality existing among the various social members consists only in this: that all men have their origin in God the Creator, have been redeemed by Jesus Christ, and are to be judged and rewarded or punished by God exactly according to their merits or demerits (Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris).

• The rich and poor, great and simple should be all united by the bonds of love

III – Hence it follows that there are, according to the ordinance of God, in human society princes and subjects, masters and proletariat, rich and poor, learned and ignorant, nobles and plebeians, all of whom, united in the bonds of love, are to help one another to attain their last end in heaven, and their material and moral welfare here on earth (Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris).

• Man has the right to the goods of the earth

IV – Of the goods of the earth man has not merely the use, like the brute creation, but he has also the right of permanent proprietorship and not merely of those things which are consumed by use, but also of those which are not consumed by us (Encyclical Rerum Novarum).

• The right of private property, fruit of labor, is a natural right

V – The right of private property, the fruit of labor or industry, or of concession or donation by others, is an incontrovertible natural right; and everybody can dispose reasonably of such property as he thinks fit (Encyclical Rerum Novarum).

• Justice and charity heal the breach between rich and poor

VI – To heal the breach between rich and poor, it is necessary to distinguish between justice and charity. There can be no claim for redress except when justice is violated (Encyclical Rerum Novarum).

• The obligations of justice are binding upon labor affairs

VII – The following are obligations of justice binding on the proletariat and the workingman: To perform fully and faithfully the work which has been freely and, according to equity, agreed upon; not to injure the property or outrage the person of masters; even in the defense of their own rights to abstain from acts of violence, and never to make mutiny of their defense (Encyclical Rerum Novarum).

• The seven obligations of justice binding capitalists in relation to workers

VIII – The following are obligations of justice binding on capitalists: To pay just wages to their workingmen; not to injure their just savings by violence or fraud, or by overt or covert usuries; not to expose them to corrupting seductions and danger of scandal; not to alienate them from the spirit of family life and from love of economy; not to impose on them labor beyond their strength, or unsuitable for their age or sex (Encyclical Rerum Novarum).

IX – It is an obligation for the rich and those who own property to succor the poor and the indigent, according to the precepts of the Gospel. This obligation is so grave that on the Day of Judgment special account will be demanded of its fulfillment, as Christ Himself has said (Mt 25), (Encyclical Rerum Novarum).

X – The poor should not be ashamed of their poverty, nor disdain the charity of the rich, for they should have especially in view Jesus the Redeemer, who, though He might have been born in riches, made Himself poor in order that He might ennoble poverty and enrich it with merits beyond price for heaven (Encyclical Rerum Novarum).

XI – For the settlement of the social question much can be done by the capitalists and workers themselves, by means of institutions designed to provide timely aid for the needy and to bring together and unite mutually the two classes. Among these institutions are mutual aid societies, various kinds of private insurance societies, orphanages for the young, and, above all, associations among the different trades and professions (Encyclical Rerum Novarum).

XII – This end is especially aimed at by the movement of Christian Popular Action of Christian Democracy in its many and varied branches. But Christian Democracy must be taken in the sense already authoritatively defined. Totally different from the movement known as ‘Social Democracy,’ it has for its basis the principles of Catholic faith and morals especially the principle of not injuring in any way the inviolable right of private property (Encyclical Graves de Communi). (Pius X. Motu proprio Fin dalla prima, Social syllabus, December 18, 1903)

…judges Francis’ idea that Christians and Muslims share the same faith

• According to modernist theories, the Islamic religious experiences are true

[For the Modernist] In the religious sentiment one must recognize a kind of intuition of the heart which puts man in immediate contact with the very reality of God […] It is this experience which, when a person acquires it, makes him properly and truly a believer. How far off we are here from Catholic teaching we have already seen in the decree of the Vatican Council. […] Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed Modernists do not deny but actually admit, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that all religions are true. That they cannot feel otherwise is clear. For on what ground, according to their theories, could falsity be predicated of any religion whatsoever? (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 14, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on good-will replacing theological investigation

• Among the many and varied subject matters offered to a spirit avid for the truth, Sacred theology has the first place

No one is unaware that among the many and varied subject matters offered to a spirit avid for the truth, Sacred theology has the first place. […] Work with intrepidity in the study of natural things, for, just as the ingenious inventions and the undertakings full of efficacy of today cause admiration, later on they will be objects of permanent approval and praise. But all this without any detriment to the sacred studies. (Pius X. Sacrorum antistitum, no. 1, September 1, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on the formation of youth

• Christians who live rashly and imprudently with regard to religion

It is a common complaint, unfortunately too well founded, that there are large numbers of Christians in our own time who are entirely ignorant of those truths necessary for salvation. And when we mention Christians, We refer not only to the masses or to those in the lower walks of life – for these find some excuse for their ignorance in the fact that the demands of their harsh employers hardly leave them time to take care of themselves or of their dear ones – but We refer to those especially who do not lack culture or talents and, indeed, are possessed of abundant knowledge regarding things of the world but live rashly and imprudently with regard to religion. It is hard to find words to describe how profound is the darkness in which they are engulfed and, what is most deplorable of all, how tranquilly they repose there. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 2-3, April 15, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea that catholics and muslims adore the same God

• To consider all religious experiences as true is the Modernist error what believes all religions are truly equal

For the Modernist believer, on the contrary, it is an established and certain fact that the divine reality does really exist in itself and quite independently of the person who believes in it. If you ask on what foundation this assertion of the Believer rests, they answer: In the experience of the individual. […] Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed Modernists do not deny but actually admit, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that all religions are true. That they cannot feel otherwise is clear. For on what ground, according to their theories, could falsity be predicated of any religion whatsoever? (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 14, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on human suffering

• Papal condemnation for the errors of modernism regarding Christ’s knowledge

[Condemned doctrine] The critic can ascribe to Christ an unlimited knowledge only on a hypothesis that cannot be historically conceived and is repugnant to the moral sense: namely, that Christ as man possessed the knowledge of God and yet was unwilling to communicate the knowledge of so many things to his disciples and posterity. Christ did not always possess the consciousness of his messianic dignity. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3434-3435. Pius X. Decree Lamentabili: Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907)

• According to agnosticism, there are two Christs: one real; the other, who never was in fact, but pertains to faith

According to agnosticism, history, just as science, is concerned only with phenomena. Therefore, just as God, so any divine intervention in human affairs must be relegated to faith, as belonging to it alone. Thus, if anything occurs consisting of a double element, divine and human, such as are Christ, the Church, the sacraments, and many others of this kind, there will have to be a division and separation, so that what was human may be assigned to history, and what divine to faith. Thus, the distinction common among the modernists between the Christ of history and the Christ of faith […] Thus they do not will that Christ said those things which appear to exceed the capacity of the listening multitude. […] For they distinguish sharply between these two histories; the history of faith (and this we wish to be well noted) they oppose to the real history, as it is real. Thus, as we have already said, the two Christs: one real, the other, who never was in fact, but pertains to faith. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3495-3498. Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on selling off churches to feed the poor

• The external pomp, by which authority in the Church is reverenced, is honor paid to Jesus Christ

Their [the modernists] general directions for the Church may be put in this way: Since the end of the Church is entirely spiritual, the religious authority should strip itself of all that external pomp which adorns it in the eyes of the public. And here they forget that while religion is essentially for the soul, it is not exclusively for the soul, and that the honor paid to authority is reflected back on Jesus Christ who instituted it. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, no. 25, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on anticlericalism

• A society comprising two categories: the Pastors and the flock

The Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of persons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful. So distinct are these categories that with the pastoral body only rests the necessary right and authority for promoting the end of the society and directing all its members towards that end; the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors. (Pius X. Encyclical Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906)

• The priestly ministry is exercised not in our own name, but in the name of Jesus Christ

These truths are all the more evident inasmuch as we exercise the priestly ministry not in our own name, but in the name of Jesus Christ. The Apostle said: Let man so consider us as the ministers of Christ and the dispensers of the mysteries of God (1 Cor 4:1); for Christ, therefore, we are ambassadors (1 Cor 5:20). This is the reason that Christ has numbered us not among his servants but as his friends. (Pius X. Exhortation Haerent animo, no. 4, August 4, 1908)

• The cleric is one who has the Lord as his portion

St. Jerome tells us that with these words ‘the cleric is reminded that one who is the portion of the Lord, or who has the Lord as his portion, must show himself to be such a one as possesses the Lord and is possessed by him’ (Ep. LII, ad Nepotianum, n. 5). (Pius X. Apostolic Exhortation Haerent animo, no. 1, August 4, 1908)

• The Lord God has placed in the priest’s hands all his treasures, his sacraments, his graces – even to open and close heaven to others

Saint Charles Borromeo gave apt expression to this thought when, in his discourses to the clergy, he declared: ‘If we would only bear in mind, dearly beloved brethren, the exalted character of the things that the Lord God has placed in our hands, what unbounded influence would not this have in impelling us to lead lives worthy of ecclesiastics! Has not the Lord placed everything in my hand, when he put there his only-begotten Son, coeternal and coequal with himself? In my hand he has placed all his treasures, his sacraments, his graces; he has placed there souls, than whom nothing can be dearer to him; in his love he has preferred them to himself, and redeemed them by his Blood; he has placed heaven in my hand, and it is in my power to open and close it to others… (Pius X. Apostolic Exhortation Haerent animo, no. 1, August 4, 1908)

• Priests must deliver souls from the bondage of sin – envoys of Christ to win the minds of men

As his envoys, we must win the minds of men for his doctrine and his law by first observing them ourselves; sharing as we do in his power to deliver souls from the bondage of sin, we must strive by every means to avoid becoming entangled in these toils of sin. (Pius X. Apostolic Exhortation Haerent animo, no. 6, August 4, 1908)

…judges Francis’ idea on material charity

• A great number of those condemned to Hell are those who ignore the mysteries of the faith

And so Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: ‘We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.’ (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 3, April 15, 1905)

• Sacred theology has the first place

No one is unaware that among the many and varied subject matters offered to a spirit avid for the truth, Sacred theology has the first place. […] Work with intrepidity in the study of natural things, for, just as the ingenious inventions and the undertakings full of efficacy of today cause admiration, later on they will be objects of permanent approval and praise. But all this without any detriment to the sacred studies. (Pius X. Sacrorum Antistitum, no. 1, September 1, 1910)

• There are large numbers of Christians today who are entirely ignorant of those truths necessary for salvation

It is a common complaint, unfortunately too well founded, that there are large numbers of Christians in our own time who are entirely ignorant of those truths necessary for salvation. And when we mention Christians, We refer not only to the masses or to those in the lower walks of life – for these find some excuse for their ignorance in the fact that the demands of their harsh employers hardly leave them time to take care of themselves or of their dear ones – but We refer to those especially who do not lack culture or talents and, indeed, are possessed of abundant knowledge regarding things of the world but live rashly and imprudently with regard to religion. It is hard to find words to describe how profound is the darkness in which they are engulfed and, what is most deplorable of all, how tranquilly they repose there. They rarely give thought to God, the Supreme Author and Ruler of all things, or to the teachings of the faith of Christ. They know nothing of the Incarnation of the Word of God, nothing of the perfect restoration of the human race which He accomplished. Grace, the greatest of the helps for attaining eternal things, the Holy Sacrifice and the Sacraments by which we obtain grace, are entirely unknown to them. They have no conception of the malice and baseness of sin; hence they show no anxiety to avoid sin or to renounce it. And so they arrive at life’s end in such a condition that, lest all hope of salvation be lost, the priest is obliged to give in the last few moments of life a summary teaching of religion, a time which should be devoted to stimulating the soul to greater love for God. And even this as too often happens only when the dying man is not so sinfully ignorant as to look upon the ministration of the priest as useless, and then calmly faces the fearful passage to eternity without making his peace with God. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 2-3, April 15, 1905)

• Christian teaching reveals God, and the truly remarkable dignity of man also

All this becomes evident on a little reflection. Christian teaching reveals God and His infinite perfection with far greater clarity than is possible by the human faculties alone. Nor is that all. This same Christian teaching also commands us to honor God by faith, which is of the mind, by hope, which is of the will, by love, which is of the heart; and thus the whole man is subjected to the supreme Maker and Ruler of all things. The truly remarkable dignity of man as the son of the heavenly Father, in Whose image he is formed, and with Whom he is destined to live in eternal happiness, is also revealed only by the doctrine of Jesus Christ. From this very dignity, and from man’s knowledge of it, Christ showed that men should love one another as brothers, and should live here as become children of light, ‘not of revelry and drunkenness, not in debauchery and wantonness, not in strife and jealousy’ (Rom 13:13). He also bids us to place all our anxiety and care in the hands of God, for He will provide for us; He tells us to help the poor, to do good to those who hate us, and to prefer the eternal welfare of the soul to the temporal goods of this life. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 4, April 15, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea that Christians should always humble themselves

• The example of Saint Anselm: humility and magnanimity, strength and gentleness

And yet Anselm in his own eyes was but a despicable and unknown good for-nothing, a man of no parts, sinful in his life. Nor did this great modesty and most sincere humility detract in the least from his high thinking, whatever may be said to the contrary by men of depraved life and judgment, of whom the Scripture says that ‘the animal man understandeth not the things of the spirit of God’ (1Cor 2:14). Thus in him there existed a wonderful harmony between qualities which the world falsely judges to be irreconcilable and contradictory: simplicity and greatness, humility and magnanimity, strength and gentleness, knowledge and piety, so that both in the beginning and throughout the whole course of his religious life ‘he was singularly esteemed by all as a model of sanctity and doctrine’ (Breviar. Rom., die 21 Aprilis). (Pius X. Encyclical Communium Rerum, no. 7-8, April 21, 1909)

• Debasing oneself before the enemies of the Church is a culpable pastoral omission

It is for you, therefore, venerable brethren, whom Divine Providence has constituted to be the pastors and leaders of the Christian people, to resist with all your strength this most fatal tendency of modern society to lull itself in a shameful indolence while war is being waged against religion, seeking a cowardly neutrality made up of weak schemes and compromises to the injury of divine and human rights, to the oblivion of Christ’s clear sentence: ‘He that is not with me is against me’ (Mt 12:30). Not indeed that it is not well at times to waive our rights as far as may lawfully be done and as the good of souls requires. And certainly this defect can never be charged to you who are spurred on by the charity of Christ. But this is only a reasonable condescension, which can be made without the slightest detriment to duty, and which does not at all affect the eternal principles of truth and justice. (Pius X. Encyclical Communium rerum, no. 31, April 21, 1909)

• It behooves us to cry aloud and make known to all the great truths of the faith

In the midst of these public calamities it behooves us to cry aloud and make known the great truths of the faith not only to the people, to the humble, the afflicted, but to the powerful and the rich, to them that decide and govern the policy of nations, to make known to all the great truths which history confirms by its great and disastrous lessons such as that ‘sin makes the nations miserable’ (Prov 14:34), ‘that a most severe judgment shall be for them that bear rule’ (Sap 4:7), with the admonition of Psalm 2: ‘And now, ye kings, understand; receive instruction, you that judge the earth. Serve the Lord with fear . . . embrace discipline lest at any time the Lord be angry, and you perish from the just way’. (Pius X. Encyclical Communium rerum, no. 24, April 21, 1909)

…judges Francis’ idea on a horizontal Church

• The Modernist illusion of a horizontal Church

It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer […] some idea may be gained of the reforming mania which possesses them […] Ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic parts. Its spirit with the public conscience, which is not wholly for democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy, and even to the laity, and authority should be decentralised. The Roman Congregations, and especially the index and the Holy Office, are to be reformed. The ecclesiastical authority must change its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political and social organization, it must adapt itself to those which exist in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, both in the estimation in which they must be held and in the exercise of them. The clergy are asked to return to their ancient lowliness and poverty, and in their ideas and action to be guided by the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, echoing the teaching of their Protestant masters, would like the suppression of ecclesiastical celibacy. What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed according to their principles? (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, no. 37, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ vision on the divorced who re-marry

• They who refuse to be subject to the law of God are his enemies

Because they who refuse to be subject to the law of God are surely reputed the enemies of God. (Pius X. Encyclical Communionum rerum, no. 21, April 21, 1909)

• Charity does not lie in the toleration of error

Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre Charge Apostolique, no. 22, August 15, 1910)

• He harms others who preaches only with complacent language

Another way to do harm is that of those who speak of religious matters as if they were to be considered according to the norms and convenience of this passing life, forgetting the eternal life to come: they speak brilliantly of the benefits that the Christian religion has bequeathed to humanity, but not of the obligations it demands; they preach the charity of Jesus Christ our Savior, but say nothing of his justice. The fruit that such preaching produces is insignificant, because any worldling who hears it becomes convinced that he is a good Christian, and that he has no need to change his life, as long as he says: I believe in Jesus Christ.

What kind of fruits do such preachers expect to reap? They certainly have no intention other than that of gaining at any cost the favor of their listeners, flattering them, and, as long as they see the church full, they do not care if the souls of the faithful remain empty. Consequently, they do not even mention sin, the four last things, or any other important topic. Rather, to obtain acclaim and applause, they use complacent language, with eloquence more fitting for worldly speeches than an apostolic and sacred sermon. Against such preachers, Saint Jerome wrote (Ad Nep.): ‘When you teach in the church, you should not merely provoke the acclamation of the congregation, but rather, compunction: may the tears of your listeners should be your praise.’ (Pius X. Motu Proprio Sacrorum antistitum, September 1, 1910)

• The truth is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. The fatal illusion of the prudence of the flesh

Venerable Brethren, how mistaken are those who think they are doing service to the Church, and producing fruit for the salvation of souls, when by a kind of prudence of the flesh […] under the fatal illusion that they are thus able more easily to win over those in error, but really with the continual danger of being themselves lost. The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts forever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. ‘Jesus Christ, today and yesterday, and the same for ever’ (Heb 13: 8). (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 25-26, March 12, 1904)

• God demands an account of all; not only of the evil they do but also of the correction of evil

It behooves Us, too, Us especially, to inculcate that other saying so noble and so paternal of Anselm: ‘Whenever I hear anything of you displeasing to God and unbecoming to yourselves, and fail to admonish you, I do not fear God nor love you as I ought’ […] then, We should imitate Anselm by renewing Our prayers, counsels, admonitions ‘that you think over these things carefully and if your conscience warns you that there is something to be corrected in them that you hasten to make the correction’ (Epist., lib. iv. epist. 32). For nothing is to be neglected that can be corrected, since God demands an account from all not only of the evil they do but also of the correction of evil which they can correct. And the more power men have to make the necessary correction the more vigorously does He require them, according to the power mercifully communicated to them, to think and act rightly . . . (Pius X. Encyclical Communium rerum, no. 26, April 21, 1909)

• Jesus’ heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, but had holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God

Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910)

• If those dedicated to the Catholic cause do not have real piety, they will not arouse others to do good

Therefore, all who are called upon to direct or dedicate themselves to the Catholic cause, must be sound Catholics, firm in faith, solidly instructed in religious matters, truly submissive to the Church and especially to this supreme Apostolic See and the Vicar of Jesus Christ. They must be men of real piety, of manly virtue, and of a life so chaste and fearless that they will be a guiding example to all others. If they are not so formed it will be difficult to arouse others to do good and practically impossible to act with a good intention. (Pius X. Encyclical Il fermo proposito, no. 11, June 11, 1905)

• Those who direct the Catholic cause must be sound Catholics

To carry it out right one must have divine grace, and the apostle receives it only if he is united to Christ. Only when he has formed Jesus Christ in himself shall he more easily be able to restore Him to the family and society. Therefore, all who are called upon to direct or dedicate themselves to the Catholic cause, must be sound Catholics, firm in faith, solidly instructed in religious matters, truly submissive to the Church and especially to this supreme Apostolic See and the Vicar of Jesus Christ. They must be men of real piety, of manly virtue, and of a life so chaste and fearless that they will be a guiding example to all others. (Pius X. Encyclical Il fermo proposito, no. 11, June 11, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea comparing Catechesis with Yoga and Zen

• The first duty of all who are entrusted with government of the Church is to instruct the faithful in the things of God

We by no means wish to conclude that a perverse will and unbridled conduct may not be joined with a knowledge of religion. Would to God that facts did not too abundantly prove the contrary! But We do maintain that the will cannot be upright nor the conduct good when the mind is shrouded in the darkness of crass ignorance. A man who walks with open eyes may, indeed, turn aside from the right path, but a blind man is in much more imminent danger of wandering away. Furthermore, there is always some hope for a reform of perverse conduct so long as the light of faith is not entirely extinguished; but if lack of faith is added to depraved morality because of ignorance, the evil hardly admits of remedy, and the road to ruin lies open. How many and how grave are the consequences of ignorance in matters of religion! And on the other hand, how necessary and how beneficial is religious instruction! It is indeed vain to expect a fulfillment of the duties of a Christian by one who does not even know them. We must now consider upon whom rests the obligation to dissipate this most pernicious ignorance and to impart in its stead the knowledge that is wholly indispensable. There can be no doubt, Venerable Brethren, that this most important duty rests upon all who are pastors of souls. On them, by command of Christ, rest the obligations of knowing and of feeding the flocks committed to their care; and to feed implies, first of all, to teach. ‘I will give you pastors according to my own heart,’ God promised through Jeremias, ‘and they shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine’ (Jer 3:15). Hence the Apostle Paul said: ‘Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel’ (1 Cor 1:17), thereby indicating that the first duty of all those who are entrusted in any way with the government of the Church is to instruct the faithful in the things of God. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 4, April 15, 1905)

• The Christian has faith, but requires teaching to develop it and make it bear fruit

It follows, too, that if faith languishes in our days, if among large numbers it has almost vanished, the reason is that the duty of catechetical teaching is either fulfilled very superficially or altogether neglected. It will not do to say, in excuse, that faith is a free gift of God bestowed upon each one at Baptism. True enough, when we are baptized in Christ, the habit of faith is given, but this most divine seed, if left entirely to itself, by its own power, so to speak, is not like the mustard seed which ‘grows up. . . and puts out great branches.’ Man has the faculty of understanding at his birth, but he also has need of his mother’s word to awaken it, as it were, and to make it active. So too, the Christian, born again of water and the Holy Spirit, has faith within him, but he requires the word of the teaching Church to nourish and develop it and to make it bear fruit. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 16, April 15, 1905)

• A great loss of souls is due to ignorance of divine things

We pray and entreat you to reflect on the great loss of souls due solely to ignorance of divine things. You have doubtless accomplished many useful and most praiseworthy works in your respective dioceses for the good of the flock entrusted to your care, but before all else, and with all possible zeal and diligence and care, see to it and urge on others that the knowledge of Christian doctrine pervades and imbues fully and deeply the minds of all. Here, using the words of the Apostle Peter, We say, ‘According to the gift that each has received, administer it to one another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God’ (1Pt 4:10). (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 27, April 15, 1905)

…judges Francis’ pro-communist ideas expressed in the Meetings with Popular Movements

• When defending the cause of the poor avoid using language that might inspire aversion toward the upper classes of society

Finally, Catholic writers, when defending the cause of the proletariat and the poor, should avoid adopting language that might inspire aversion toward the upper classes of society. Refrain from speaking of vindication and justice, when in reality it is simply charity that is concerned, as has already been explained. Remember that Jesus Christ wished to unite all men within the bond of mutual love, which is the perfection of justice, and which includes the obligation of working for each other’s reciprocal welfare. (Pius X. Motu Proprio Fin dalla prima (Sillabo sociale), no. 19, December 18, 1903)

 

…judges Francis’ ideas on faith being revolutionary

• A vice common to the enemies of the faith: repudiating all respect and obedience for authority

What truly is the point of departure of the enemies of religion for the sowing of the great and serious errors by which the faith of so many is shaken? They begin by denying that man has fallen by sin and been cast down from his former position. […] It is moreover a vice common to the enemies of the faith of our time especially that they repudiate and proclaim the necessity of repudiating all respect and obedience for the authority of the Church, and even of any human power, in the idea that it will thus be more easy to make an end of faith. Here we have the origin of Anarchism, than which nothing is more pernicious and pestilent to the order of things whether natural or supernatural. (Pius X. Encyclical Ad Diem illud Laetissimum, no. 22, February 2, 1904)

• Jesus exhorted love of our neighbor without instilling sentiments of rebellion – He did not respect false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared

We wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, prevailing within the Sillon and elsewhere. As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one’s personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism. (Pius X. Apostolic letter Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910)

• The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators

Let not these priests be misled, in the maze of current opinions, by the miracles of a false Democracy. Let them not borrow from the Rhetoric of the worst enemies of the Church and of the people, the high-flown phrases, full of promises; which are as high-sounding as unattainable. Let them be convinced that the social question and social science did not arise only yesterday; that the Church and the State, at all times and in happy concert, have raised up fruitful organizations to this end; that the Church, which has never betrayed the happiness of the people by consenting to dubious alliances, does not have to free herself from the past; that all that is needed is to take up again, with the help of the true workers for a social restoration, the organisms which the Revolution shattered, and to adapt them, in the same Christian spirit that inspired them, to the new environment arising from the material development of today’s society. Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists. (Pius X. Apostolic letter Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910)

…judges Francis’ ideas on finding God

• Necessity of constant prayer for spiritual progress

It is the priest, more than any other, who is bound to obey scrupulously the command of Christ: We ought always pray (Lk 18:1). […] How numerous are the opportunities of turning to God in prayer which present themselves daily to the soul which is eager for its own sanctification and the salvation of others! Anguish of soul, the persistent onslaught of temptation, our lack of virtue, slackness and failure in our works, our many offenses and negligences, fear of the divine judgment, all these should move us to approach the Lord with tears, in order to obtain help from him and also to increase without difficulty the treasure of our merit in his eyes. (Pius X. Apostolic Exhortation Haerent Animo, August 4, 1908)

…judges Francis’ words in his first appearance

• The Church is essentially an unequal society comprising two categories: Pastors and flock

The Scripture teaches us, and the tradition of the Fathers confirms the teaching, that the Church is the mystical body of Christ, ruled by the Pastors and Doctors (Eph 4, 11) – a society of men containing within its own fold chiefs who have full and perfect powers for ruling, teaching and judging (Mt 28: 18-20; 16:18-19; 18: 17; Tit 2:15; 2Cor 10: 6; 13:10 etc.). It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of persons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful. So distinct are these categories that with the pastoral body only rests the necessary right and authority for promoting the end of the society and directing all its members towards that end; the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors. (Pius X. Encyclical Vehementer nos, no. 8, February 11, 1906)

…judges Francis’ ideas on the norms of the Church

• Christ made the Church the depositary of His doctrine and His laws

Now the way to reach Christ is not hard to find: it is the Church. Rightly does Chrysostom inculcate: ‘The Church is thy hope, the Church is thy salvation, the Church is thy refuge’ (Hom. de capto Euthropio, no. 6). It was for this that Christ founded it, gaining it at the price of His blood, and made it the depositary of His doctrine and His laws, bestowing upon it at the same time an inexhaustible treasury of graces for the sanctification and salvation of men. (Pius X. Encyclical E Suprem apostolatus, no. 9, October 4, 1903)

…judges Francis’ idea that the Pope should not judge

• The pastors of the Christian people have the duty to resist neutrality and compromise

It is for you, therefore, venerable brethren, whom Divine Providence has constituted to be the pastors and leaders of the Christian people, to resist with all your strength this most fatal tendency of modern society to lull itself in a shameful indolence while war is being waged against religion, seeking a cowardly neutrality made up of weak schemes and compromises to the injury of divine and human rights, to the oblivion of Christ’s clear sentence: ‘He that is not with me is against me’ (Mt 12: 30). (Saint Pius X. Encyclical Communium rerum, April 21, 1909)

 … judges Francis’ ideas on the evangelization of the Americas

• Your nations have remained faithful to their faith and traditions

I congratulate you and all of the Bishops of Spanish America, because your nations […] have remained faithful to their faith and traditions. With this act of fidelity, which today you manifest toward Spain, you show your recognition of the debt of gratitude that you owe it, and that you praise; because unlike other peoples who, being favored by God, have nonetheless turned their backs to the Vicar of Christ, showing themselves to be extremely ungrateful, Spain, despite all difficulties, has always remained faithful to the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman religion, and, will surely remain so in the future. (Pius X. Allocution, November 22, 1908)

…judges Francis’ idea on the Church reduced to a minority

• The first duty of the Hierarchy is to instruct the faithful in the things of God

We must now consider upon whom rests the obligation to dissipate this most pernicious ignorance and to impart in its stead the knowledge that is wholly indispensable. There can be no doubt, Venerable Brethren, that this most important duty rests upon all who are pastors of souls. On them, by command of Christ, rest the obligations of knowing and of feeding the flocks committed to their care; and to feed implies, first of all, to teach. ‘I will give you pastors according to my own heart’, God promised through Jeremias, ‘and they shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine’ (Jer 3:15). […] the first duty of all those who are entrusted in any way with the government of the Church is to instruct the faithful in the things of God. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 7, April 15, 1905)

• Nothing is more desirable to Jesus Christ than labor in teaching the eternal profit of the soul

We do not think it necessary to set forth here the praises of such instruction or to point out how meritorious it is in God’s sight. If, assuredly, the alms with which we relieve the needs of the poor are highly praised by the Lord, how much more precious in His eyes, then, will be the zeal and labor expended in teaching and admonishing, by which we provide not for the passing needs of the body but for the eternal profit of the soul! Nothing, surely, is more desirable, nothing more acceptable to Jesus Christ, the Savior of souls, Who testifies of Himself through Isaias: ‘To bring good news to the poor he has sent me’ (Lk 4:18). Here then it is well to emphasize and insist that for a priest there is no duty more grave or obligation more binding than this. […] Because the Christian people expect from them knowledge of the divine law, and it was for that end that they were sent by God. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo nimis, no. 8-9, April 15, 1905)

• Seriously mistaken: those who seek the material well-being of the body but are silent about spiritual welfare

And so too are all they seriously mistaken who, occupying themselves with the welfare of the people, and especially upholding the cause of the lower classes, seek to promote above all else the material well-being of the body and of life, but are utterly silent about their spiritual welfare and the very serious duties which their profession as Christians enjoins upon them. (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda sane, no. 26, March 12, 1904)

…judges Francis’ idea on equality as the source of justice and happiness

• To preserve the diversity of classes is an attribute of a soundly constituted State

But in this respect the principles of Catholic doctrine have been defined, and the history of Christian civilization bears witness to their beneficent fruitfulness. Our Predecessor of happy memory re-affirmed them in masterly documents, and all Catholics dealing with social questions have the duty to study them and to keep them in mind. He taught, among other things, that ‘Christian Democracy must preserve the diversity of classes which is assuredly the attribute of a soundly constituted State, and it must seek to give human society the form and character which God, its Author, has imparted to it.’ Our Predecessor denounced ‘A certain Democracy which goes so far in wickedness as to place sovereignty in the people and aims at the suppression of classes and their leveling down.’ At the same time, Leo XIII laid down for Catholics a program of action, the only program capable of putting society back onto its centuries old Christian basis. […] Further, they reject the doctrine recalled by Leo XIII on the essential principles of society; they place authority in the people, or gradually suppress it and strive, as their ideal, to effect the leveling down of the classes. In opposition to Catholic doctrine, therefore, they are proceeding towards a condemned ideal. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, no. 9, August 15, 1910)

• To consider every inequality as an injustice: is not Catholic

Thus, to the Sillon, every inequality of condition is an injustice, or at least, a diminution of justice? Here we have a principle that conflicts sharply with the nature of things, a principle conducive to jealously, injustice, and subversive to any social order. […] Therefore, when he said that justice could be found in any of the three aforesaid forms of government, he was teaching that in this respect Democracy does not enjoy a special privilege. The Sillonists who maintain the opposite view, either turn a deaf ear to the teaching of the Church or form for themselves an idea of justice and equality which is not Catholic. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, August 15, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on the role of non-christian religions

• Modernists admit that all religions are true: what is to prevent religious experience from being met within every religion?

In the religious sentiment one must recognise a kind of intuition of the heart which puts man in immediate contact with the very reality of God […]. It is this experience which, when a person acquires it, makes him properly and truly a believer. How far off we are here from Catholic teaching we have already seen in the decree of the Vatican Council. […] Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed Modernists do not deny but actually admit, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that all religions are true. That they cannot feel otherwise is clear. For on what ground, according to their theories, could falsity be predicated of any religion whatsoever? (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, no. 14, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on the multiplication of the loaves

• Those who go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church in the interpretation of Sacred Scripture fall into serious errors

With truly lamentable results, our age, casting aside all restraint in its search for the ultimate causes of things, frequently pursues novelties so ardently that it rejects the legacy of the human race. Thus it falls into very serious errors, which are even more serious when they concern sacred authority, the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, and the principal mysteries of Faith. The fact that many Catholic writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church herself is extremely regrettable. In the name of higher knowledge and historical research (they say), they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas. (Pius X. Decree Lamentabili sane exitu, July 3, 1907)

• Condemned: the idea that the Evangelists recorded false things which would be profitable for their readers

[Condemned and proscribe]: 14. In many narrations the Evangelists recorded, not so much things that are true, as things which, even though false, they judged to be more profitable for their readers.

Until the time the canon was defined and constituted, the Gospels were increased by additions and corrections. Therefore there remained in them only a faint and uncertain trace of the doctrine of Christ. (Pius X. Decree Lamentabili sane exitu, July 3, 1907)

• Excommunication latae sententiae for those who defend propositions, opinions or teachings condemned in the decree Lamentabili sane exitu

Moreover, in order to check the daily increasing audacity of many modernists who are endeavoring by all kinds of sophistry and devices to detract from the force and efficacy not only of the decree Lamentabili sane exitu (the so-called Syllabus), issued by our order by the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition on July 3 of the present year, but also of our encyclical letters Pascendi dominici gregis given on September 8 of this same year, we do by our apostolic authority repeat and confirm both that decree of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and those encyclical letters of ours, adding the penalty of excommunication against their contradictors, and this we declare and decree that should anybody, which may God forbid, be so rash as to defend any one of the propositions, opinions or teachings condemned in these documents he falls, ipso facto, under the censure contained under the chapter ‘Docentes’ of the constitution Apostolicae Sedis, which is the first among the excommunications latae sententiae, simply reserved to the Roman Pontiff. This excommunication is to be understood as salvis poenis, which may be incurred by those who have violated in any way the said documents, as propagators and defenders of heresies, when their propositions, opinions and teachings are heretical, as has happened more than once in the case of the adversaries of both these documents, especially when they advocate the errors of the modernists that is, the synthesis of all heresies. (Pius X. Motu Proprio Proprio Praestatia Scripturae, November 18, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on the formation of consciences

• Bishops have the duty of forming the consciences of the people

As for you, Venerable Brethren, carry on diligently with the work of the Saviour of men by emulating His gentleness and His strength. Minister to every misery; let no sorrow escape your pastoral solicitude; let no lament find you indifferent. But, on the other hand, preach fearlessly their duties to the powerful and to the lowly; it is your function to form the conscience of the people and of the public authorities. The social question will be much nearer a solution when all those concerned, less demanding as regards their respective rights, shall fulfill their duties more exactingly. (Pius X. Notre charge apostolique, no. 39, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on knowing God’s will from the people

• Disordered by the stain of the first sin man needs a guide to lead him back to the paths of justice: the knowledge of divine things

Disordered by the stain of the first sin, and almost forgetful of God, its Author, it improperly turns every affection to a love of vanity and deceit. This erring will, blinded by its own evil desires, has need therefore of a guide to lead it back to the paths of justice whence it has so unfortunately strayed. The intellect itself is this guide, which need not be sought elsewhere, but is provided by nature itself. It is a guide, though, that, if it lack its companion light, the knowledge of divine things, will be only an instance of the blind leading the blind so that both will fall into the pit. […] But We do maintain that the will cannot be upright nor the conduct good when the mind is shrouded in the darkness of crass ignorance. A man who walks with open eyes may, indeed, turn aside from the right path, but a blind man is in much more imminent danger of wandering away. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo Nimis, April 15, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea that the Virgin Mary was capable to rebel against God

• By this companionship in suffering between Mother and the Son, She is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces

By this companionship in sorrow and suffering already mentioned between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the august Virgin to be the most powerful Mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her Divine Son. […] Yet, since Mary carries it over all in holiness and union with Jesus Christ, and has been associated by Jesus Christ in the work of redemption, she merits for us de congruo, in the language of theologians, what Jesus Christ merits for us de condigno, and she is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces. (Pius X. Encyclical Ad diem illum laetissimum, nos. 13-14, February 2, 1904)

• Not merely occupied in contemplating the cruel spectacle, Mary rejoiced that her Only Son was offered for the salvation of mankind

Moreover it was not only the prerogative of the Most Holy Mother to have furnished the material of His flesh to the Only Son of God, Who was to be born with human members (S. Bede Ven. L. Iv. in Luc. xl.), of which material should be prepared the Victim for the salvation of men; but hers was also the office of tending and nourishing that Victim, and at the appointed time presenting Him for the sacrifice. Hence that uninterrupted community of life and labors of the Son and the Mother, so that of both might have been uttered the words of the Psalmist ‘My life is consumed in sorrow and my years in groans’ (Ps 30:11). When the supreme hour of the Son came, beside the Cross of Jesus there stood Mary His Mother, not merely occupied in contemplating the cruel spectacle, but rejoicing that her Only Son was offered for the salvation of mankind, and so entirely participating in His Passion, that if it had been possible she would have gladly borne all the torments that her Son bore (S. Bonav. I Sent d. 48, ad Litt. dub. 4). (Pius X. Encyclical Ad diem illum laetissimum, no. 12, February 2, 1904)

…judges Francis’ idea on communion to divorced in second union

• Frequent communion in the state of grace and with a right and pious intention

Let frequent and daily communion . . . be available to all of Christ’s faithful of every order or condition, such that no one, who is in the state of grace and approaches the sacred table with a right and pious intention, be excluded from this. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3379. Pius X, Decree of the Congregation of the Holy Council, approved by Pius X, December 20th, 1905 – Spanish)

…judges Francis’ idea on the harmony among good and evil

• A false notion of the Magisterium – a common mind whose office is to find and determine the formula that corresponds best with common conscience

But far more advanced and far more pernicious are their [the modernists] teachings on doctrinal and dogmatic authority. This is their conception of the magisterium of the Church: No religious society, they say, can be a real unit unless the religious conscience of its members be one, and one also the formula which they adopt. But this double unity requires a kind of common mind whose office is to find and determine the formula that corresponds best with the common conscience, and it must have moreover an authority sufficient to enable it to impose on the community the formula which has been decided upon. From the combination and, as it were fusion of these two elements, the common mind which draws up the formula and the authority which imposes it, arises, according to the Modernists, the notion of the ecclesiastical magisterium. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, no. 24, September 8, 1907)

• The primary duty of charity does not lie in the tolerance of false ideas

Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged […] If, as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, August 23, 1910)

• The office divinely committed to the Pope: to guard with the greatest vigilance the deposit of the faith and to reject profane novelties

The office divinely committed to Us of feeding the Lord’s flock has especially this duty assigned to it by Christ, namely, to guard with the greatest vigilance the deposit of the faith delivered to the saints, rejecting the profane novelties of words and oppositions of knowledge falsely so called. There has never been a time when this watchfulness of the supreme pastor was not necessary to the Catholic body; for, owing to the efforts of the enemy of the human race, there have never been lacking ‘men speaking perverse things’ (Acts 20:30), ‘vain talkers and seducers’ (Tit 1:10), ‘erring and driving into error’ (2Tim 3:13). (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, nos. 1, September 8, 1907)

• Those who despise apostolic traditions and embrace vain doctrines condemned by the Church: blind, leaders of the blind, and moved by blind passion

Blind that they are, and leaders of the blind, inflated with a boastful science, they have reached that pitch of folly where they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true nature of the religious sentiment; with that new system of theirs they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, condemned by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can rest and maintain truth itself. […] But for Catholics the second Council of Nicea will always have the force of law, where it condemns those who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical traditions, to invent novelties of some kind . . . or endeavour by malice or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, nos. 1, 11, 42, September 8, 1907)

• A Modernist error: evolution in the Church results from two conflicting forces, one tending to progress and the other to conservation

… studying more closely the ideas of the Modernists, evolution is described as resulting from the conflict of two forces, one of them tending towards progress, the other towards conservation. The conserving force in the Church is tradition […] The progressive force, on the contrary, which responds to the inner needs lies in the individual consciences and ferments there […] Now it is by a species of compromise between the forces of conservation and of progress, that is to say between authority and individual consciences, that changes and advances take place. […] Thus then, Venerable Brethren, for the Modernists, both as authors and propagandists, there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, no. 27-8, September 8, 1907)

• The Pope must guard the purity of the Faith and discipline, especially when evil is concealed in ambiguous expressions with emotional high-sounding words

Our Apostolic Mandate requires from Us that We watch over the purity of the Faith and the integrity of Catholic discipline. It requires from Us that We protect the faithful from evil and error; especially so when evil and error are presented in dynamic language which, concealing vague notions and ambiguous expressions with emotional and high-sounding words, is likely to set ablaze the hearts of men in pursuit of ideals which, whilst attractive, are nonetheless nefarious. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre charge apostolique, no. 1, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on ‘culture of encounter’

• There is no true civilization without the Church

There is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. (Pius X. Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique, August 23, 1910)

…judges Francis’ idea on the evils in our times

• Ignorance of divine things is the chief cause of the present weakness of souls and the serious evils that result from it

Now, more than ever before, the prediction of the Apostle to the elders of the Church of Ephesus seems to be verified: ‘I know that . . . fierce wolves will get in among you, and will not spare the flock’ (Acts 20:29). Those who still are zealous for the glory of God are seeking the causes and reasons for this decline in religion. Coming to a different explanation, each points out, according to his own view, a different plan for the protection and restoration of the kingdom of God on earth. But it seems to Us, Venerable Brethren, that while we should not overlook other considerations, We are forced to agree with those who hold that the chief cause of the present indifference and, as it were, infirmity of soul, and the serious evils that result from it, is to be found above all in ignorance of things divine. This is fully in accord with what God Himself declared through the prophet Hosea: ‘And there is no knowledge of God in the land. Cursing and lying and killing and theft and adultery have overflowed: and blood hath touched blood. Thereafter shall the land mourn, and everyone that dwelleth in it shall languish’ (Hos 4:1-3). (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo Nimis, no. 1, April 15, 1905)

• Apostasy from God is the terrible and deep rooted malady to blame for the disastrous state of human society today

 Then again, to omit other motives, We were terrified beyond all else by the disastrous state of human society today. For who can fail to see that society is at the present time, more than in any past age, suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction? You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is – apostasy from God, than which in truth nothing is more allied with ruin, according to the word of the Prophet: ‘For behold they that go far from Thee shall perish’ (Ps 72:26). We saw therefore that, in virtue of the ministry of the Pontificate, which was to be entrusted to Us, We must hasten to find a remedy for this great evil, considering as addressed to Us that Divine command: ‘Lo, I have set thee this day over the nations and over kingdoms, to root up, and to pull down, and to waste, and to destroy, and to build, and to plant’ (Jer 1:10). But, cognizant of Our weakness, We recoiled in terror from a task as urgent as it is arduous. (Pius X. Encyclical E supremi apostolatus, nos.2, 3, October 4, 1903)

…judges Francis’ idea on the impossibility of finding God with entire certainty

• The sureness of the Christian is founded in the moral truth of the Church

No matter what the Christian does, even in the realm of temporal goods, he cannot ignore the supernatural good. Rather, according to the dictates of Christian philosophy, he must order all things to the ultimate end, namely, the Highest Good. All his actions, insofar as they are morally either good or bad (that is to say, whether they agree or disagree with the natural and divine law), are subject to the judgment and judicial office of the Church. (Pius X. Encyclical Singulari Quadam, September 24, 1912)

…judges Francis’ idea on new customs among today’s youth

• Neutrality before the onslaughts of the world is cowardice

It is for you, therefore, venerable brethren, whom Divine Providence has constituted to be the pastors and leaders of the Christian people, to resist with all your strength this most fatal tendency of modern society to lull itself in a shameful indolence while war is being waged against religion, seeking a cowardly neutrality made up of weak schemes and compromises to the injury of divine and human rights, to the oblivion of Christ’s clear sentence: ‘He that is not with me is against me’ (Mt 12:30). (Pius X. Encyclical Communium rerum, April 21, 1909)

…judges Francis’ idea on clarity and doctrinal security

• A tactic of the Modernists: presenting doctrine without clarity

But since the Modernists (as they are commonly and rightly called) employ a very clever artifice, namely, to present their doctrines without order and systematic arrangement into one whole, scattered and disjointed one from another, so as to appear to be in doubt and uncertainty, while they are in reality firm and steadfast, it will be of advantage, Venerable Brethren, to bring their teachings together here into one group, and to point out the connexion between them, and thus to pass to an examination of the sources of the errors, and to prescribe remedies for averting the evil. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, no. 4, September 8, 1907)

• The passion for novelties is always united in Modernists with hatred for scholasticism

They recognise that the three chief difficulties for them are scholastic philosophy, the authority of the fathers and tradition, and the magisterium of the Church, and on these they wage unrelenting war. For scholastic philosophy and theology they have only ridicule and contempt. Whether it is ignorance or fear, or both, that inspires this conduct in them, certain it is that the passion for novelty is always united in them with hatred of scholasticism, and there is no surer sign that a man is on the way to Modernism than when he begins to show his dislike for this system. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, no. 42, September 8, 1907)

• Far, far from the clergy be the love of novelty!

Equal diligence and severity are to be used in examining and selecting candidates for Holy Orders. Far, far from the clergy be the love of novelty! God hates the proud and the obstinate. (Pius X. Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, no. 49, September 8, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on the obedience of a Religious

• Always grow in obedience to the pastors of the Church

May the reverence and obedience which you solemnly pledged to those whom the Holy Spirit has appointed to rule the Church, increase and gain strength; and especially, may your minds and hearts be linked by ever closer ties of loyalty to this Apostolic See which justly claims your respectful homage. (Pius X. Encyclical Haerent animos, no. 31, August 4, 1908)

…judges Francis’ idea on the teaching of moral issues

• He who omits to teach the truth, cannot expect good works…

Now, if we cannot expect to reap a harvest when no seed has been planted, how can we hope to have a people with sound morals if Christian doctrine has not been imparted to them in due time? It follows, too, that if faith languishes in our days, if among large numbers it has almost vanished, the reason is that the duty of catechetical teaching is either fulfilled very superficially or altogether neglected. (Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo Nimis, no. 16, April 15, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea on the Pope

• The Church is an unequal society, in which some preside over others

The Scripture teaches us, and the tradition of the Fathers confirms the teaching, that the Church is the mystical body of Christ, ruled by the Pastors and Doctors (1Eph 4:2 ss) – a society of men containing within its own fold chiefs who have full and perfect powers for ruling, teaching and judging (Mt 28:18-20, 16:18-19, 18:17, Tit 2:15, 2Cor 10:6, 13:10, etc.) It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of persons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful. So distinct are these categories that with the pastoral body only rests the necessary right and authority for promoting the end of the society and directing all its members towards that end. (Pius X. Encyclical Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906)

…judges Francis’ idea on the access to the sacraments

• Frequent Communion… but in the state of grace and with upright intention

Let frequent and daily communion… be available to all Christians of every order or condition, so that no one, who is in the state of grace and approaches the sacred table with a right and pious mind, may be prevented from this. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3379. Pius X, From the Decree of the Congregation of the Holy Council December 16, 1905)

• Necessity of a firm resolution to never sin in order to receive Communion

Although it is especially expedient that those who practice frequent and daily communion be free from venial sins, at least those completely deliberate, and of their effect, it is enough, nevertheless, that they be free from mortal sins, with the resolution that they will never sin in the future. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3381. Pius X, From the Decree of the Congregation of the Holy Council December 16, 1905)

 …judges Francis’ idea on the Re-reading of the Gospel

• Condemnation of the doctrines that advocate adapting Revelation to modernity

[Proposition condemned:] The progress of the sciences demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine about God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, the Redemption, be recast. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3464, Pius X, Encyclical Lamentabili Sane – Syllabus of Errors of the Modernists, no. 64, July 3, 1907)

…judges Francis’ idea on fraternal love

• Those who use merely complacent words may harm their brothers and sisters

Another way to do harm is that of those who speak of religious matters as if they were to be considered according to the norms and convenience of this passing life, forgetting the eternal life to come: they speak brilliantly of the benefits that the Christian religion has bequeathed to humanity, but not of the obligations it demands; they preach the charity of Jesus Christ our Savior, but say nothing of his justice. The fruit that such preaching produces is insignificant, because any worldling who hears it becomes convinced that he is a good Christian, and that he has no need to change his life, as long as he says: I believe in Jesus Christ.
What kind of fruits do such preachers expect to reap? They certainly have no intention other than that of gaining at any cost the favor of their listeners, flattering them, and, as long as they see the church full, they do not care if the souls of the faithful remain empty. Consequently, they do not even mention sin, the four last things, or any other important topic. Rather, to obtain acclaim and applause, they use complacent language, with eloquence more fitting for worldly speeches than an apostolic and sacred sermon. Against such preachers, Saint Jerome wrote (Ad Nep.): ‘When you teach in the church, you should not merely provoke the acclamation of the congregation, but rather, compunction: may the tears of your listeners should be your praise.’ (Pius X. Motu Proprio Sacrorum Antistitum, September 1, 1910)

• The toleration of error is not charity

Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from the love for God, Who is Father to all and the goal of the whole human family, and for Jesus Christ, whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre Charge Apostolique, no. 22, August 15, 1910)

• It is worthwhile to cut off a limb in order to save the whole body

For, while Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His Heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched who scandalize the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as He was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing and teaching us that often fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it sometimes is fitting to cut off a limb to save the body. (Pius X. Encyclical Notre Charge Apostolique, no. 38, August 15, 1910)

• Those who silence the teachings of the serious obligations of the Christian faith are mistaken

How mistaken are those who think they are doing service to the Church, and producing fruit for the salvation of souls, when by a kind of prudence of the flesh […] under the fatal illusion that they are thus able more easily to win over those in error, but really with the continual danger of being themselves lost. The truth is one, and it cannot be halved; it lasts forever, and is not subject to the vicissitudes of the times. ‘Jesus Christ, today and yesterday, and the same for ever’ (Heb 13:8).
And so too are all they seriously mistaken who, occupying themselves with the welfare of the people, and especially upholding the cause of the lower classes, seek to promote above all else the material well-being of the body and of life, but are utterly silent about their spiritual welfare and the very serious duties which their profession as Christians enjoins upon them. They are not ashamed to conceal sometimes, as though with a veil, certain fundamental maxims of the Gospel, for fear lest otherwise the people refuse to hear and follow them. (Pius X. Encyclical Iucunda Sane, no. 25, March 12, 1904)

• God demands an account of those who omit correction

It behooves Us, too, Us especially, to inculcate that other saying so noble and so paternal of Anselm: ‘Whenever I hear anything of you displeasing to God and unbecoming to yourselves, and fail to admonish you, I do not fear God nor love you as I ought.’ […] We should imitate Anselm by renewing Our prayers, counsels, admonitions ‘that you think over these things carefully and if your conscience warns you that there is something to be corrected in them that you hasten to make the correction’ (Epist., lib. iv. epist. 32). For nothing is to be neglected that can be corrected, since God demands an account from all not only of the evil they do but also of the correction of evil which they can correct. And the more power men have to make the necessary correction the more vigorously does He require them, according to the power mercifully communicated to them, to think and act rightly. (Pius X. Encyclical Communium Rerum, April 21, 1909)

• If those called to dedicate themselves to the Church fail to give good example, they will not attract others

Therefore, all who are called upon to direct or dedicate themselves to the Catholic cause, must be sound Catholics, firm in faith, solidly instructed in religious matters, truly submissive to the Church and especially to this supreme Apostolic See and the Vicar of Jesus Christ. They must be men of real piety, of manly virtue, and of a life so chaste and fearless that they will be a guiding example to all others. If they are not so formed it will be difficult to arouse others to do good and practically impossible to act with a good intention. (Pius X. Encyclical Il Fermo Proposito, no. 11, June 11, 1905)

…judges Francis’ idea of the Roman Curia

• The Church is a society wherein some preside over others

 The Scripture teaches us, and the tradition of the Fathers confirms the teaching, that the Church is the mystical body of Christ, ruled by the Pastors and Doctors (Eph 4:2ss) – a society of men containing within its own fold chiefs who have full and perfect powers for ruling, teaching and judging (Mt 28:18-20; 16:18-19; 18:17; Tit 2:15; 2Cor 10:6; 13:10 etc.) It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful. So distinct are these categories that with the pastoral body only rests the necessary right and authority for promoting the end of the society and directing all its members towards that end.  (Pius X. Encyclical Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906)

…judges Francis’ idea on Peace…

• Peace Will Only Come About Through the Light of Reason Directed by the Knowledge of Divine Things

We are forced to agree with those who hold that the chief cause of the present indifference and, as it were, infirmity of soul, and the serious evils that result from it, is to be found above all in ignorance of things divine. This is fully in accord with what God Himself declared through the Prophet Hosea: “And there is no knowledge of God in the land. Cursing and lying and killing and theft and adultery have overflowed: and blood hath touched blood. Thereafter shall the land mourn, and everyone that dwelleth in it shall languish.”(Hos 4:1-3) […] The Apostle Paul, writing to the Ephesians, repeatedly admonished them in these words: “But immorality and every uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as become saints; or obscenity or foolish talk.” (Eph 5:34) He also places the foundation of holiness and sound morals upon a knowledge of divine things – which holds in check evil desires: “See to it therefore, brethren, that you walk with care: not as unwise but as wise. . . Therefore, do not become foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.” (Eph 5:15-16) […] And rightly so. For the will of man retains but little of that divinely implanted love of virtue and righteousness by which it was, as it were, attracted strongly toward the real and not merely apparent good. Disordered by the stain of the first sin, and almost forgetful of God, its Author, it improperly turns every affection to a love of vanity and deceit. This erring will, blinded by its own evil desires, has need therefore of a guide to lead it back to the paths of justice whence it has so unfortunately strayed. The intellect itself is this guide, which need not be sought elsewhere, but is provided by nature itself. It is a guide, though, that, if it lack its companion light, the knowledge of divine things, will be only an instance of the blind leading the blind so that both will fall into the pit […] The truly remarkable dignity of man as the son of the heavenly Father, in Whose image he is formed, and with Whom he is destined to live in eternal happiness, is also revealed only by the doctrine of Jesus Christ. From this very dignity, and from man’s knowledge of it, Christ showed that men should love one another as brothers, and should live here as become children of light, “not of revelry and drunkenness, not in debauchery and wantonness, not in strife and jealousy.” (Rm 13:13) He also bids us to place all our anxiety and care in the hands of God, for He will provide for us; He tells us to help the poor, to do good to those who hate us, and to prefer the eternal welfare of the soul to the temporal goods of this life.[…] The will cannot be upright nor the conduct good when the mind is shrouded in the darkness of crass ignorance. A man who walks with open eyes may, indeed, turn aside from the right path, but a blind man is in much more imminent danger of wandering away.  (Saint Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo Nimis, on the Teaching of Christian Doctrine, April 15, 1905)

•  The Gravest Duty of the Pastor is to Instruct the Faithful

We must now consider upon whom rests the obligation to dissipate this most pernicious ignorance and to impart in its stead the knowledge that is wholly indispensable. There can be no doubt, Venerable Brethren, that this most important duty rests upon all who are pastors of souls. On them, by command of Christ, rest the obligations of knowing and of feeding the flocks committed to their care; and to feed implies, first of all, to teach. “I will give you pastors according to my own heart,” God promised through Jeremiah, “and they shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine.”(Jer 3:15) Hence the Apostle Paul said: “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel,” (1Cor 1:17) thereby indicating that the first duty of all those who are entrusted in any way with the government of the Church is to instruct the faithful in the things of God. […] If, assuredly, the alms with which we relieve the needs of the poor are highly praised by the Lord, how much more precious in His eyes, then, will be the zeal and labor expended in teaching and admonishing, by which we provide not for the passing needs of the body but for the eternal profit of the soul! […] Here then it is well to emphasize and insist that for a priest there is no duty more grave or obligation more binding than this. Who, indeed, will deny that knowledge should be joined to holiness of life in the priest? “For the lips of the priest shall keep knowledge.”(Mal 2:7) For this reason the Council of Trent, treating of the duties of pastors of souls, decreed that their first and most important work is the instruction of the faithful. (Sess. V, cap. 2, De Reform.; Sess. XXII, cap. 8; Sess. XXIV, cap. 4 & 7, De Reform.) Thus wrote the Apostle: “Faith then depends on hearing, and hearing on the word of Christ”;( Rom 10:17) and to show the necessity of instruction, he added, “How are they to hear, if no one preaches?”(Rom 10:14). (Saint Pius X. Encyclical Acerbo Nimis, on the Teaching of Christian Doctrine, April 15, 1905)

Pope Pius X required all Catholic clergy to take the anti-modernist oath

St. Pius X, Pray For Us

The Oath Against Modernism

Author: Pope Pius X

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day.

And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated:

Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time.

Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time.

Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely.

Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our Creator and Lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality—that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm.

Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact—one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history—the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . . pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day.

And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated:

Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time.

Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time.

Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely.

Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our Creator and Lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality—that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm.

Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact—one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history—the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .

Lamentabili Sane, July 3, 1907
Syllabus Condemning the Errors of the Modernists

With truly lamentable results, our age, casting aside all restraint in its search for the ultimate causes of things, frequently pursues novelties so ardently that it rejects the legacy of the human race. Thus it falls into very serious errors, which are even more serious when they concern sacred authority, the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, and the principal mysteries of Faith. The fact that many Catholic writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church herself is extremely regrettable. In the name of higher knowledge and historical research (they say), they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas.

These errors are being daily spread among the faithful. Lest they captivate the faithfuls' minds and corrupt the purity of their faith. His Holiness, Pius X, by Divine Providence, Pope, has decided that the chief errors should be noted and condemned by the Office of this Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition.

Therefore, after a very diligent investigation and consultation with the Reverend Consultors, the Most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinal, the General Inquisitors in matters of faith and morals have judged the following propositions to be condemned and proscribed. In fact, by this general decree, they are condemned and proscribed.

1. The ecclesiastical law which prescribes that books concerning the Divine Scriptures are subject to previous examination does not apply to critical scholars and students of scientific exegesis of the Old and New Testament.    CONDEMNED

2. The Church's interpretation of the Sacred Books is by no means to be rejected; nevertheless, it is subject to the more accurate judgment and correction of the exegetes.    CONDEMNED

3. From the ecclesiastical judgments and censures passed against free and more scientific exegesis, one can conclude that the Faith the Church proposes contradicts history and that Catholic teaching cannot really be reconciled with the true origins of the Christian religion.    CONDEMNED

4. Even by dogmatic definitions the Church's magisterium cannot determine the genuine sense of the Sacred Scriptures.    CONDEMNED

5. Since the deposit of Faith contains only revealed truths, the Church has no right to pass judgment on the assertions of the human sciences.    CONDEMNED

6. The "Church learning" and the "Church teaching" collaborate in such a way in defining truths that it only remains for the "Church teaching" to sanction the opinions of the "Church learning."    CONDEMNED

7. In proscribing errors, the Church cannot demand any paternal assent from the faithful by which the judgments she issues are to be embraced.    CONDEMNED

8. They are free from all blame who treat lightly the condemnations passed by the Sacred Congregation of the Index or by the Roman Congregations.    CONDEMNED

9. They display excessive simplicity or ignorance who believe that God is really the author of the Sacred Scriptures.    CONDEMNED

10. The inspiration of the books of the Old Testament consists in this: The Israelite writers handed down religious doctrines under a peculiar aspect which was either little or not at all known to the Gentiles.    CONDEMNED

11. Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error.    CONDEMNED

12. If he wishes to apply himself usefully to Biblical studies, the exegete must first put aside all preconceived opinions about the supernatural origin of Sacred Scripture and interpret it the same as any other merely human document.    CONDEMNED

13. The Evangelists themselves, as well as the Christians of the second and third generation, artificially arranged the evangelical parables. In such a way they explained the scanty fruit of the preaching of Christ among the Jews.    CONDEMNED

14. In many narrations the Evangelists recorded, not so much things that are true, as things which, even though false, they judged to be more profitable for their readers.    CONDEMNED

15. Until the time the canon was defined and constituted, the Gospels were increased by additions and corrections. Therefore there remained in them only a faint and uncertain trace of the doctrine of Christ.    CONDEMNED

16. The narrations of John are not properly history, but a mystical contemplation of the Gospel. The discourses contained in his Gospel are theological meditations, lacking historical truth concerning the mystery of salvation.    CONDEMNED

17. The fourth Gospel exaggerated miracles not only in order that the extraordinary might stand out but also in order that it might become more suitable for showing forth the work and glory of the Word Incarnate.    CONDEMNED

18. John claims for himself the quality of witness concerning Christ. In reality, however, he is only a distinguished witness of the Christian life, or of the life of Christ in the Church at the close of the first century.    CONDEMNED

19. Heterodox exegetes have expressed the true sense of the Scriptures more faithfully than Catholic exegetes.    CONDEMNED

20. Revelation could be nothing else than the consciousness man acquired of his relation to God.    CONDEMNED

21. Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles.    CONDEMNED

22. The dogmas the Church holds out as revealed are not truths which have fallen from heaven. They are an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by laborious effort.    CONDEMNED

23. Opposition may, and actually does, exist between the facts narrated in Sacred Scripture and the Church's dogmas which rest on them. Thus the critic may reject as false facts the Church holds as most certain.    CONDEMNED

24. The exegete who constructs premises from which it follows that dogmas are historically false or doubtful is not to be reproved as long as he does not directly deny the dogmas themselves.    CONDEMNED

25. The assent of faith ultimately rests on a mass of probabilities.    CONDEMNED

26. The dogmas of the Faith are to be held only according to their practical sense; that is to say, as preceptive norms of conduct and not as norms of believing.    CONDEMNED

27. The divinity of Jesus Christ is not proved from the Gospels. It is a dogma which the Christian conscience has derived from the notion of the Messias.    CONDEMNED

28. While He was exercising His ministry, Jesus did not speak with the object of teaching He was Messias, nor did His miracles tend to prove it.    CONDEMNED

29. It is permissible to grant that the Christ of history is far inferior to the Christ Who is the object of faith.    CONDEMNED

30. In all the evangelical texts the name "Son of God" is equivalent only to that of "Messias." It does not in the least way signify that Christ is the true and natural Son of God.    CONDEMNED

31. The doctrine concerning Christ taught by Paul, John, and the Councils of Nicaea, Ephesus and Chalcedon is not that which Jesus taught but that which the Christian conscience conceived concerning Jesus.    CONDEMNED

32. It is impossible to reconcile the natural sense of the Gospel texts with the sense taught by our theologians concerning the conscience and the infallible knowledge of Jesus Christ.    CONDEMNED

33. Everyone who is not led by preconceived opinions can readily see that either Jesus professed an error concerning the immediate Messianic coming or the greater part of His doctrine as contained in the Gospels is destitute of authenticity.    CONDEMNED

34. The critics can ascribe to Christ a knowledge without limits only on a hypothesis which cannot be historically conceived and which is repugnant to the moral sense. That hypothesis is that Christ as man possessed the knowledge of God and yet was unwilling to communicate the knowledge of a great many things to His disciples and posterity.    CONDEMNED

35. Christ did not always possess the. consciousness of His Messianic dignity.    CONDEMNED

36. The Resurrection of the Saviour is not properly a fact of the historical order. It is a fact of merely the supernatural order (neither demonstrated nor demonstrable) which the Christian conscience gradually derived from other facts.    CONDEMNED

37. In the beginning, faith in the Resurrection of Christ was not so much in the fact itself of the Resurrection as in the immortal life of Christ with God.    CONDEMNED

38. The doctrine of the expiatory death of Christ is Pauline and not evangelical.    CONDEMNED

39. The opinions concerning the origin of the Sacraments which the Fathers of Trent held and which certainly influenced their dogmatic canons are very different from those which now rightly exist among historians who examine Christianity.    CONDEMNED

40. The Sacraments had their origin in the fact that the Apostles and their successors, swayed and moved by circumstances and events, interpreted some idea and intention of Christ.    CONDEMNED

41. The Sacraments are intended merely to recall to man's mind the ever-beneficent presence of the Creator.    CONDEMNED

42. The Christian community imposed the necessity of Baptism, adopted it as a necessary rite, and added to it the obligation of the Christian profession.    CONDEMNED

43. The practice of administering Baptism to infants was a disciplinary evolution, which became one of the causes why the Sacrament was divided into two, namely. Baptism and Penance.    CONDEMNED

44. There is nothing to prove that the rite of the Sacrament of Confirmation was employed by the Apostles. The formal distinction of the two Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation does not pertain to the history of primitive Christianity.    CONDEMNED

45. Not everything which Paul narrates concerning the institution of the Eucharist (I Cor. 11; 23-25) is, to be taken historically.    CONDEMNED

46. In the primitive Church the concept of the Christian sinner reconciled by the authority of the Church did not exist. Only very slowly did the Church accustom herself to this concept. As a matter of fact, even after Penance was recognized as an institution of the Church, it was not called a Sacrament since it would be held as a disgraceful Sacrament.    CONDEMNED

47. The words of the Lord, "Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained" (John 20: 22-23), in no way refer to the Sacrament of Penance, in spite of what it pleased the Fathers of Trent to say.    CONDEMNED

48. In his Epistle (Ch. 5:14-15) James did not intend to promulgate a Sacrament of Christ but only commend a pious custom. If in this custom he happens to distinguish a means of grace, it is not in that rigorous manner in which it was taken by the theologians who laid down the notion and number of the Sacraments.    CONDEMNED

49. When the Christian supper gradually assumed the nature of a liturgical action those who customarily presided over the supper acquired the sacerdotal character.    CONDEMNED

50. The elders who fulfilled the office of watching over the gatherings of the faithful were instituted by the Apostles as priests or bishops to provide for the necessary ordering of the increasing communities and not properly for the perpetuation of the Apostolic mission and power.    CONDEMNED

51. It is impossible that Matrimony could have become a Sacrament of the new law until later in the Church since it was necessary that a full theological explication of the doctrine of grace and the Sacraments should first take place before Matrimony should be held as a Sacrament.    CONDEMNED

52. It was far from the mind of Christ to found a Church as a society which would continue on earth for a long course of centuries. On the contrary, in the mind of Christ the kingdom of heaven together with the end of the world was about to come immediately.    CONDEMNED

53. The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable. Like human society, Christian society is subject to a perpetual evolution.    CONDEMNED

54. Dogmas, Sacraments and hierarchy, both their notion and reality, are only interpretations and evolutions of the Christian intelligence which have increased and perfected by an external series of additions the little germ latent in the Gospel.    CONDEMNED

55. Simon Peter never even suspected that Christ entrusted the primacy in the Church to him.    CONDEMNED

56. The Roman Church became the head of all the churches, not through the ordinance of Divine Providence, but merely through political conditions.    CONDEMNED

57. The Church has shown that she is hostile to the progress of the natural and theological sciences.    CONDEMNED

58. Truth is no more immutable than man himself, since it evolved with him, in him, and through him.    CONDEMNED

59. Christ did not teach a determined body of doctrine applicable to all times and all men, but rather inaugurated a religious movement adapted or to be adapted to different times and places.    CONDEMNED

60. Christian Doctrine was originally Judaic. Through successive evolutions it became first Pauline, then Joannine, finally Hellenic and universal.    CONDEMNED

61. It may be said without paradox that there is no chapter of Scripture, from the first of Genesis to the last of the Apocalypse, which contains a doctrine absolutely identical with that which the Church teaches on the same matter. For the same reason, therefore, no chapter of Scripture has the same sense for the critic and the theologian.    CONDEMNED

62. The chief articles of the Apostles' Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first ages as they have for the Christians of our time.    CONDEMNED

63. The Church shows that she is incapable of effectively maintaining evangelical ethics since she obstinately clings to immutable doctrines which cannot be reconciled with modem progress.    CONDEMNED

64. Scientific progress demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, and Redemption be readjusted.    CONDEMNED

65. Modern Catholicism can be reconciled with true science only if it is transformed into a non-dogmatic Christianity; that is to say, into a broad and liberal Protestantism.    CONDEMNED

The following Thursday, the fourth day of the same month and year, all these matters were accurately reported to our Most Holy Lord, Pope Pius X. His Holiness approved and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent Fathers and ordered that each and every one of the above-listed propositions be held by all as condemned and proscribed.

Peter Palombelli,

Notary of the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition

On Rejecting Inovation and Protecting the Faith

"Our Apostolic Mandate requires from Us that We watch over the purity of the Faith and the integrity of Catholic discipline. It requires from Us that We protect the faithful from evil and error; especially so when evil and error are presented in dynamic language which, concealing vague notions and ambiguous expressions with emotional and high-sounding words, is likely to set ablaze the hearts of men in pursuit of ideals which, whilst attractive, are nonetheless nefarious."

Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique, 1910.

". . . . it is well known that to the Church there belongs no right whatsoever to innovate anything touching on the substance of the sacraments."

Pope St. Pius X, Ex quo, Dec. 26, 1910 as sourced from Denzinger. 2147 a