<![CDATA[The Catacombs - Cardinal Pie]]> https://thecatacombs.org/ Thu, 07 May 2026 13:28:46 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[Cardinal Pie: The Family is the First Society]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=990 Mon, 01 Feb 2021 02:54:11 +0000 Hildegard of Bingen]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=990 THE FAMILY IS THE FIRST SOCIETY – according to Cardinal Pie
 
 The Family is the First Society.  Msgr. P:ie, the Doctor of social worship, would first speak of domestic worship, indispensable prelude of public worship, in the strict sense.  In 1854, in the Synodal Letter of the Fathers of the Council of Rochelle, he made this to be inserted in its deliberations. (Vol. II, 148-150).  We cite the principal passages.  It is a magnificent picture of the Christian family:
 
      “In the language of St. Paul, each home is a sanctuary.  Let the Crucifix of Jesus Christ be found there as the sign of every Christian home and let the image of Mary, the Mother of God and our Mother, be inseparable from the Crucifix!  Let holy water and blessed palms protect the house against the ambushes of the enemy; let the candles of the Candlemas (in the book the word that appears as “Chandelier”, unfortunately it is a miss translation from chandeleur which is Candlemas) be conserved so as to be lighted in the times of danger, at the hour of agony and of death.  Ah! Would that our fathers possess the secret of this totally Christian life where religion had its place marked in all things.  Mealtime would be sanctified by the blessing that would be recited by the head of the family.  Three times a day, when the sacred sound would ring out from the parish bell-tower, each one would suspend his work to lovingly invoke the Virgin who has given to the world the Word made flesh.  At the end of the property a cross would be planted that the worker could piously greet upon returning from his day’s work.  Again, one would find, in the course of the work-day, some moments to recite the rosary; there would be read some pages from a handed-down book that contained the principle facts from the two testaments and the most beautiful features from the lives of the Saints.  The mother of the family would not feel she had fulfilled all her religious duties other than when she had been able to explain to her children and to her servants some article of Christian doctrine.  If it happened that the funeral bell tolled announcing a death, all the brothers and all the sisters in Jesus Christ of the deceased would promptly accord to them the benefit of their suffrages; and the prayers for the dead so neglected today would be brought about by various testimonials and by the practices that could not be overstated.  Finally, when the last ray of daylight would surround the hearth around the dispersed family, how touching was it to see the elderly and the children, masters and servants, genuflect before the holy images, to intermingle in a single prayer their voices and their love?  These pious expressions drew down upon earth blessings from heaven; they enabled the house at the same time that they sanctified and reflected upon society so grave a matter, so worthy to maintain, along with the unity of the dogmas of the faith, innocence of morals and the union of wills.
 
     “Would that we could see these touching practices of Christian times revived.” (II, 149-150.  See also V, 21, 29: Allocution pronounced following the consecration of the altar of a certain chapel, Aug. 4, 1863.)
 
     Nothing is left out in this program of Christian family life.  But Msgr. Pie knew what an important and delicate role is reserved in the family for the Christian woman: it is she who keeps watch over the faith.  She is encouraged to fulfill this sublime role with perfection and, by thus encouraging the family, she shows them that they must work also, in its turn, for the Christian social restoration.  We listen: “During the first half of this (19th) century, the Church has not encountered under its hand another truly conservative element, no other seriously powerful conservative than the French woman. . . . These are the French women who have prevented the worship of the Name of God from perishing upon the land and who, despite sarcasms and scorn, have preserved in their hearts and in their practices the religion of Jesus Christ.”  But as for the Christian women of today to be worthy of those who have preceded them, it behooves them “to preserve in themselves the life of faith and of grace, the spirit of renouncement and sacrifice.”  They are exhorted to be energetically opposed “to those new habits, to those allurements that are foreign to the traditions of our national and Christian education, which threatens to substitute to this smooth modesty, to this noble and reserved affluence, to this cheerful and bright charm, in a word, to all the inexpressible qualities that have rendered French women the admiration of the whole world.”  (Eulogy of Saint Theodosius: II, 1-14)
 
     In order to maintain and develop Christian life in the domestic realm, Msgr. Pie consecrated the families of this diocese to the Sacred Heart. (VI, 614)
 
 
 
Source:  The Book “The Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ according to Cardinal Pie” in English, pages 98-100.  An English translation by Daniel Leonardi. The French version can be found in "Oeuvres de Monseigneur L'Eveque de Poitiers - Tome II, page 149.  
 
 ]]> THE FAMILY IS THE FIRST SOCIETY – according to Cardinal Pie
 
 The Family is the First Society.  Msgr. P:ie, the Doctor of social worship, would first speak of domestic worship, indispensable prelude of public worship, in the strict sense.  In 1854, in the Synodal Letter of the Fathers of the Council of Rochelle, he made this to be inserted in its deliberations. (Vol. II, 148-150).  We cite the principal passages.  It is a magnificent picture of the Christian family:
 
      “In the language of St. Paul, each home is a sanctuary.  Let the Crucifix of Jesus Christ be found there as the sign of every Christian home and let the image of Mary, the Mother of God and our Mother, be inseparable from the Crucifix!  Let holy water and blessed palms protect the house against the ambushes of the enemy; let the candles of the Candlemas (in the book the word that appears as “Chandelier”, unfortunately it is a miss translation from chandeleur which is Candlemas) be conserved so as to be lighted in the times of danger, at the hour of agony and of death.  Ah! Would that our fathers possess the secret of this totally Christian life where religion had its place marked in all things.  Mealtime would be sanctified by the blessing that would be recited by the head of the family.  Three times a day, when the sacred sound would ring out from the parish bell-tower, each one would suspend his work to lovingly invoke the Virgin who has given to the world the Word made flesh.  At the end of the property a cross would be planted that the worker could piously greet upon returning from his day’s work.  Again, one would find, in the course of the work-day, some moments to recite the rosary; there would be read some pages from a handed-down book that contained the principle facts from the two testaments and the most beautiful features from the lives of the Saints.  The mother of the family would not feel she had fulfilled all her religious duties other than when she had been able to explain to her children and to her servants some article of Christian doctrine.  If it happened that the funeral bell tolled announcing a death, all the brothers and all the sisters in Jesus Christ of the deceased would promptly accord to them the benefit of their suffrages; and the prayers for the dead so neglected today would be brought about by various testimonials and by the practices that could not be overstated.  Finally, when the last ray of daylight would surround the hearth around the dispersed family, how touching was it to see the elderly and the children, masters and servants, genuflect before the holy images, to intermingle in a single prayer their voices and their love?  These pious expressions drew down upon earth blessings from heaven; they enabled the house at the same time that they sanctified and reflected upon society so grave a matter, so worthy to maintain, along with the unity of the dogmas of the faith, innocence of morals and the union of wills.
 
     “Would that we could see these touching practices of Christian times revived.” (II, 149-150.  See also V, 21, 29: Allocution pronounced following the consecration of the altar of a certain chapel, Aug. 4, 1863.)
 
     Nothing is left out in this program of Christian family life.  But Msgr. Pie knew what an important and delicate role is reserved in the family for the Christian woman: it is she who keeps watch over the faith.  She is encouraged to fulfill this sublime role with perfection and, by thus encouraging the family, she shows them that they must work also, in its turn, for the Christian social restoration.  We listen: “During the first half of this (19th) century, the Church has not encountered under its hand another truly conservative element, no other seriously powerful conservative than the French woman. . . . These are the French women who have prevented the worship of the Name of God from perishing upon the land and who, despite sarcasms and scorn, have preserved in their hearts and in their practices the religion of Jesus Christ.”  But as for the Christian women of today to be worthy of those who have preceded them, it behooves them “to preserve in themselves the life of faith and of grace, the spirit of renouncement and sacrifice.”  They are exhorted to be energetically opposed “to those new habits, to those allurements that are foreign to the traditions of our national and Christian education, which threatens to substitute to this smooth modesty, to this noble and reserved affluence, to this cheerful and bright charm, in a word, to all the inexpressible qualities that have rendered French women the admiration of the whole world.”  (Eulogy of Saint Theodosius: II, 1-14)
 
     In order to maintain and develop Christian life in the domestic realm, Msgr. Pie consecrated the families of this diocese to the Sacred Heart. (VI, 614)
 
 
 
Source:  The Book “The Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ according to Cardinal Pie” in English, pages 98-100.  An English translation by Daniel Leonardi. The French version can be found in "Oeuvres de Monseigneur L'Eveque de Poitiers - Tome II, page 149.  
 
 ]]> <![CDATA[Cardinal Pie: Jesus Christ is King of the Nations]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=853 Sun, 17 Jan 2021 14:07:58 +0000 Stone]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=853 Jesus Christ is King of the Nations!
[Translated from the French here via machine translation]

Jesus Christ is king; he is not one of the prophets, not one of the evangelists and apostles who does not assure him of his quality and his attributions of king. Jesus is still in the cradle, and already the Magi seek the King of the Jews Ubi is who is natu, rex Judoerum? Jesus is on the verge of death: Pilate asks him: So you are king: Ergo rex are you? You said it, Jesus answers. And this answer is made with such an accent of authority that Pilate, notwithstanding all the representations of the Jews, consecrates the kingship of Jesus by a public writing and a solemn poster .

Write, then, write, O Pilate, the words which God dictates to you, and of which you do not understand the mystery. Whatever one may say and represent, beware of changing what is already written in heaven. May your orders be irrevocable, because they are executing an immutable stop of the Almighty. That the kingship of Jesus Christ be promulgated in the Hebrew language, which is the language of the people of God, and in the Greek language, which is the language of the teachers and philosophers, and in the Roman language which is the language of the empire and the world, the language of the conquerors and politicians. Come now, O Jews, heirs of the promises; and you, O Greeks, inventors of the arts; and you, Romans, masters of the earth; come and read this admirable sign; bend your knee before your King.

Hear the last words that N.-S. address to His Apostles, before ascending to heaven: All power was given to me in heaven and on earth. Go and teach all nations. Notice, my brethren, Jesus Christ does not say all men, all individuals, all families, but all nations. It does not only say: Baptize the children, catechize the adults, marry the spouses, administer the sacraments, give the religious burial to the dead. No doubt, the mission that He confers on them understands all this, but it understands more than that, it has a public, social character because Jesus Christ is the king of peoples and nations. And as God sent the ancient prophets to the nations and to their chiefs to reproach them for their apostasies and their crimes, so Christ sends His apostles and priesthood to the peoples, to the empires, to the rulers and the legislators to teach all His doctrine and His law. Their duty, like that of St. Paul, is to bear the name of Jesus Christ before the nations and kings and sons of Israel.

Thus, Jesus Christ gives His Apostles the official mission to preach His social reign, even more, He wants this reign to be proclaimed by all the faithful. He will have him asked every day by every Christian in the Pater's prayer. Never has the divine founder of Christianity better revealed to the earth what a Christian should be than when he taught His disciples how to pray. In fact, prayer being like the religious breathing of the soul, it is in the elementary formula that Jesus Christ has given that we must seek the whole program and the whole spirit of Christianity. Let's listen to Teacher's current lesson. So you will pray, said Jesus. Sic ergo your orabitis. Our Father who is in heaven, hallowed be your name, May your kingdom come, may your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

The Christian, therefore, is not as seems to believe it and as affirms every day and on all the tones a certain contemporary world, it is not therefore a being who isolates himself in himself, who is sequestrated in an oratory indistinctly closed to all the rumors of the age, and which, satisfied provided he saves his soul, takes no care of the business of this world. The Christian is the opposite of that. The Christian is a public and social man par excellence, his nickname indicates it: he is Catholic, which means universal. Jesus Christ, in tracing the Lord's prayer, ordered that none of his people could perform the first act of the religion which is the prayer, without being in contact, according to his degree of intelligence and according to his the expanse of the horizon open before him, with all that can advance or delay, favor or prevent the reign of God on earth.
And as assuredly the works of man must be coordinated with his prayer, he is not a Christian worthy of the name who does not actively employ himself to the extent of his forces, to procure this temporal reign of God and to reverse which hinders him.

-Mgr Pie - November 8, 1859 - Homily on the panegyric of St. Emilian
]]> Jesus Christ is King of the Nations!
[Translated from the French here via machine translation]

Jesus Christ is king; he is not one of the prophets, not one of the evangelists and apostles who does not assure him of his quality and his attributions of king. Jesus is still in the cradle, and already the Magi seek the King of the Jews Ubi is who is natu, rex Judoerum? Jesus is on the verge of death: Pilate asks him: So you are king: Ergo rex are you? You said it, Jesus answers. And this answer is made with such an accent of authority that Pilate, notwithstanding all the representations of the Jews, consecrates the kingship of Jesus by a public writing and a solemn poster .

Write, then, write, O Pilate, the words which God dictates to you, and of which you do not understand the mystery. Whatever one may say and represent, beware of changing what is already written in heaven. May your orders be irrevocable, because they are executing an immutable stop of the Almighty. That the kingship of Jesus Christ be promulgated in the Hebrew language, which is the language of the people of God, and in the Greek language, which is the language of the teachers and philosophers, and in the Roman language which is the language of the empire and the world, the language of the conquerors and politicians. Come now, O Jews, heirs of the promises; and you, O Greeks, inventors of the arts; and you, Romans, masters of the earth; come and read this admirable sign; bend your knee before your King.

Hear the last words that N.-S. address to His Apostles, before ascending to heaven: All power was given to me in heaven and on earth. Go and teach all nations. Notice, my brethren, Jesus Christ does not say all men, all individuals, all families, but all nations. It does not only say: Baptize the children, catechize the adults, marry the spouses, administer the sacraments, give the religious burial to the dead. No doubt, the mission that He confers on them understands all this, but it understands more than that, it has a public, social character because Jesus Christ is the king of peoples and nations. And as God sent the ancient prophets to the nations and to their chiefs to reproach them for their apostasies and their crimes, so Christ sends His apostles and priesthood to the peoples, to the empires, to the rulers and the legislators to teach all His doctrine and His law. Their duty, like that of St. Paul, is to bear the name of Jesus Christ before the nations and kings and sons of Israel.

Thus, Jesus Christ gives His Apostles the official mission to preach His social reign, even more, He wants this reign to be proclaimed by all the faithful. He will have him asked every day by every Christian in the Pater's prayer. Never has the divine founder of Christianity better revealed to the earth what a Christian should be than when he taught His disciples how to pray. In fact, prayer being like the religious breathing of the soul, it is in the elementary formula that Jesus Christ has given that we must seek the whole program and the whole spirit of Christianity. Let's listen to Teacher's current lesson. So you will pray, said Jesus. Sic ergo your orabitis. Our Father who is in heaven, hallowed be your name, May your kingdom come, may your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

The Christian, therefore, is not as seems to believe it and as affirms every day and on all the tones a certain contemporary world, it is not therefore a being who isolates himself in himself, who is sequestrated in an oratory indistinctly closed to all the rumors of the age, and which, satisfied provided he saves his soul, takes no care of the business of this world. The Christian is the opposite of that. The Christian is a public and social man par excellence, his nickname indicates it: he is Catholic, which means universal. Jesus Christ, in tracing the Lord's prayer, ordered that none of his people could perform the first act of the religion which is the prayer, without being in contact, according to his degree of intelligence and according to his the expanse of the horizon open before him, with all that can advance or delay, favor or prevent the reign of God on earth.
And as assuredly the works of man must be coordinated with his prayer, he is not a Christian worthy of the name who does not actively employ himself to the extent of his forces, to procure this temporal reign of God and to reverse which hinders him.

-Mgr Pie - November 8, 1859 - Homily on the panegyric of St. Emilian
]]> <![CDATA[Cardinal Pie: The Sacred Heart of Jesus]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=850 Sun, 17 Jan 2021 13:41:41 +0000 Stone]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=850 The Angelus: May 2004


THE SACRED HEART OF JESUS CHRIST
Five Minutes with Cardinal Pie

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.explicit.bing.net%...%3DApi&f=1]


Nothing is more founded on reason, nothing is more conformed to the doctrines of the Faith than the adoration of the Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The heart of Jesus is what there is most profound in creation. It is the noblest part of the holy human nature of the Word made Flesh. In our very physical nature, the heart is everything: when it functions in an irregular manner, life is in danger; when it ceases to beat, man immediately ceases to live. Likewise in the moral order: it is through the heart that we are something. It is the heart which gives to thoughts, to actions, to intentions, their value, good or bad. The good is what comes out of the good treasure of our heart (Lk. 6:45). What constitutes evil is the bad dispositions of the heart (Mt. 15:19). Also, while the eye of man takes hold and fixes on exterior appearances, God looks only at the heart (I Kgs. 16:7). In the language of all peoples..., the heart has always signified courage, virtue, and especially love. After the grave has snatched away a cherished being from us, we believe that we still hold him completely if we possess his heart. This part, separate from the rest of the body, seems to remain essential.

Now, having stated this, what adoration do we not owe to the Heart of Jesus? Physically, this heart has been the principal organ of a life all together divine and human. This heart has painstakingly given up, one after the other, all the drops of the redeeming Blood. It has exuded and exudes each day all the drops of the Eucharistic chalice. And if the material heart of Jesus is already worthy of honor, what is it if we consider this Heart as the seat of His love, as the principle of His inspirations? When I adore the Heart of Jesus, I adore this effusion of eternal charity which has prompted the Word of God to offer Himself as victim for our redemption. I adore this love which has confined a God for nine months in the womb of Mary, which has given birth to God as an infant in Bethlehem, which has nailed Him to the cross; this love which keeps Him night and day on our altars, this love which spreads torrents from heaven or from the tabernacle, and which is diffused into hearts. Magdalen covered the feet of Jesus with her kisses and her perfumes, but His Heart made these feet run in search of the wandering sheep in pursuit of the poor sinner's soul. The invalids and all those who were suffering invoked the all-mighty arm of Jesus, but this arm was acting only under the guidance and by the impulse of His Heart. The children of Judea loved to be touched by the divine hands of Jesus, but these tender hands were only the instruments of His Heart. One among them, already a young man, was one day the object of an inexpressible glance from Jesus, but this sweet and penetrating glance... was a lightening bolt flashing forth the fire of love from His heart (Mk. 10:21).

To you who hardly give allowance to the veneration of the Heart of Jesus, what then are you leaving of Him to me, since the Heart of Jesus is the whole of Jesus? If you forbid me to love and honor His Heart, then you forbid me to think of Jesus, to love and honor Jesus. Deprive Him of His Heart, He will no longer be Jesus to me. But, beware, your censures would not succeed in stopping me. I have in my favor the authority of the very institution of Jesus. On the eve of His death, after giving His love to those close to Him in this world, He made an admirable summary, a marvelous memorial of all His gifts. It seems that nothing more could be added to this supreme invention of His love. But behold that, on the very day of His death, having offered up His great cry and commended His spirit, Jesus...provided for the accomplishment of a last oracle. What do I see? The side of Jesus opened, and His Heart offered to the eyes of mankind to be the object of their adoration and of their love! "Observe," says St. Augustine, "[St. John] has been mindful of the language he was to use." The word has fallen from a reflective and vigilant pen. The holy writer was careful not to say that the point of the lance had struck, had wounded–this expression or any similar might not have rendered the truth–but that it opened the side of Jesus in order that the gateway of life might be in some way made manifest in this Divine Heart, the source of the redemption, from which have flowed all the mysteries, all the sacraments of the Church, without which we have no access to the life which is the true life.

There it is, the first basis and the first establishment of the devotion to the Heart of Jesus. And if–notwithstanding the evidence through the centuries of a school of fervent worshippers and passionate admirers of this glorious Heart–the worship of the Sacred Heart is only taking its more explicit form in these last ages by a doctrinal and liturgical development, I would say that we see there a providential progress, an expansion of love announced by the prophets. "There will be in the last days," Zacharias had said, "a fountain open to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (Zach. 13:1). This gushing source is the Heart of Jesus, offered more authentically to us and reviving in our souls new impulses of ardor and of piety.

Who could remain cold and indifferent to the Heart of Jesus? It would mean not having a heart ourselves. God forbid I not speak to you of the Heart of Jesus without speaking also of your own heart, and without placing these two hearts in the presence of each other.

Your reason may have been misled, deceived, corrupted in many ways. You have been born and raised in an evil century. You have participated in a great many errors of your time. Moreover, the original fall has left a profound devastation in all of us; it has since gutted everything. However, in spite of the inclinations of corrupted nature, the allurements of the senses, and the prejudices of education, your heart has remained stronger than your mind. No matter what you do, below all these evil layers which have superimposed themselves one after another through acts of sin and lies, there remains at the core of your being a nucleus, a germ, a power for good that nothing has been able to destroy. In a word, there rests in your heart a faculty and a need to love: a faculty which can never completely translate itself into action, a need which can never find its hunger totally filled, as long as your love does not move towards its infinite end. I declare and promise that it is impossible for you to genuinely place the heart which beats in your breast in opposition to the Heart of Jesus without it immediately being carried toward His Heart by this movement of love which is the essential act of religion, and which, in itself, constitutes the accomplishment of all the divine law of the Old and New Testament: "Diliges: You will love." This is why the Lord makes His tender invitation: "My son, give me thy heart" (Prov. 23:26), as though He were saying: Willingly I set aside all others. You will easily acknowledge, My son, that my spirit is above thine. Therefore, do not enter into a useless discussion with Me. For Me, I will always easily overcome your mind, if you want to give Me your heart completely: "Præbe, fili mi, cor tuum mihi: My son, give Me thy heart."

When you have withdrawn from Jesus Christ, you have withdrawn from your own heart. The Psalmist declared it thus: "Cor meum dereliquit me: My heart has abandoned me." Fugitives from this better portion of yourselves, come back, come back to your heart (Is. 66:8). Lord Jesus, You are the center and the magnet of hearts. Man will never place himself again under the inspirations of his own heart, without being carried back immediately to You.

The Catholic Faith is truly the religion of hearts, and the veneration of the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ is the substantial summary of all Catholicism. The One who dwells in inaccessible light in heaven, wanting to draw nearer to us, to proportion Himself to us, to bring Himself to our level, at our ability, has taken our nature, our flesh. He made Himself man, and being man, He had a heart. And we also, although brought out of nothingness and formed from mud, we have received and carry in ourselves a heart. Here is the Creator and the creature, heaven and earth, Heart to heart. All religion is summed up in this Heart-to-heart confrontation of God and man. Let us pray with the Church the invitatory of one of the most ancient offices of the Sacred Heart: "Deus ergo nos apponentem Cor suum, venite adoremus: God, in the Person of Jesus Christ, His Son, disposing His Heart to us, let us come and adore Him."

- From Œuvres Sacerdotales du Cardinal Pie, Choix de Sermons et d'Instructions de 1839 a 1849 ["Homily for the Closing of a Novena to the Sacred Heart of Jesus," VI, 609-614].
]]> The Angelus: May 2004


THE SACRED HEART OF JESUS CHRIST
Five Minutes with Cardinal Pie

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.explicit.bing.net%...%3DApi&f=1]


Nothing is more founded on reason, nothing is more conformed to the doctrines of the Faith than the adoration of the Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The heart of Jesus is what there is most profound in creation. It is the noblest part of the holy human nature of the Word made Flesh. In our very physical nature, the heart is everything: when it functions in an irregular manner, life is in danger; when it ceases to beat, man immediately ceases to live. Likewise in the moral order: it is through the heart that we are something. It is the heart which gives to thoughts, to actions, to intentions, their value, good or bad. The good is what comes out of the good treasure of our heart (Lk. 6:45). What constitutes evil is the bad dispositions of the heart (Mt. 15:19). Also, while the eye of man takes hold and fixes on exterior appearances, God looks only at the heart (I Kgs. 16:7). In the language of all peoples..., the heart has always signified courage, virtue, and especially love. After the grave has snatched away a cherished being from us, we believe that we still hold him completely if we possess his heart. This part, separate from the rest of the body, seems to remain essential.

Now, having stated this, what adoration do we not owe to the Heart of Jesus? Physically, this heart has been the principal organ of a life all together divine and human. This heart has painstakingly given up, one after the other, all the drops of the redeeming Blood. It has exuded and exudes each day all the drops of the Eucharistic chalice. And if the material heart of Jesus is already worthy of honor, what is it if we consider this Heart as the seat of His love, as the principle of His inspirations? When I adore the Heart of Jesus, I adore this effusion of eternal charity which has prompted the Word of God to offer Himself as victim for our redemption. I adore this love which has confined a God for nine months in the womb of Mary, which has given birth to God as an infant in Bethlehem, which has nailed Him to the cross; this love which keeps Him night and day on our altars, this love which spreads torrents from heaven or from the tabernacle, and which is diffused into hearts. Magdalen covered the feet of Jesus with her kisses and her perfumes, but His Heart made these feet run in search of the wandering sheep in pursuit of the poor sinner's soul. The invalids and all those who were suffering invoked the all-mighty arm of Jesus, but this arm was acting only under the guidance and by the impulse of His Heart. The children of Judea loved to be touched by the divine hands of Jesus, but these tender hands were only the instruments of His Heart. One among them, already a young man, was one day the object of an inexpressible glance from Jesus, but this sweet and penetrating glance... was a lightening bolt flashing forth the fire of love from His heart (Mk. 10:21).

To you who hardly give allowance to the veneration of the Heart of Jesus, what then are you leaving of Him to me, since the Heart of Jesus is the whole of Jesus? If you forbid me to love and honor His Heart, then you forbid me to think of Jesus, to love and honor Jesus. Deprive Him of His Heart, He will no longer be Jesus to me. But, beware, your censures would not succeed in stopping me. I have in my favor the authority of the very institution of Jesus. On the eve of His death, after giving His love to those close to Him in this world, He made an admirable summary, a marvelous memorial of all His gifts. It seems that nothing more could be added to this supreme invention of His love. But behold that, on the very day of His death, having offered up His great cry and commended His spirit, Jesus...provided for the accomplishment of a last oracle. What do I see? The side of Jesus opened, and His Heart offered to the eyes of mankind to be the object of their adoration and of their love! "Observe," says St. Augustine, "[St. John] has been mindful of the language he was to use." The word has fallen from a reflective and vigilant pen. The holy writer was careful not to say that the point of the lance had struck, had wounded–this expression or any similar might not have rendered the truth–but that it opened the side of Jesus in order that the gateway of life might be in some way made manifest in this Divine Heart, the source of the redemption, from which have flowed all the mysteries, all the sacraments of the Church, without which we have no access to the life which is the true life.

There it is, the first basis and the first establishment of the devotion to the Heart of Jesus. And if–notwithstanding the evidence through the centuries of a school of fervent worshippers and passionate admirers of this glorious Heart–the worship of the Sacred Heart is only taking its more explicit form in these last ages by a doctrinal and liturgical development, I would say that we see there a providential progress, an expansion of love announced by the prophets. "There will be in the last days," Zacharias had said, "a fountain open to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (Zach. 13:1). This gushing source is the Heart of Jesus, offered more authentically to us and reviving in our souls new impulses of ardor and of piety.

Who could remain cold and indifferent to the Heart of Jesus? It would mean not having a heart ourselves. God forbid I not speak to you of the Heart of Jesus without speaking also of your own heart, and without placing these two hearts in the presence of each other.

Your reason may have been misled, deceived, corrupted in many ways. You have been born and raised in an evil century. You have participated in a great many errors of your time. Moreover, the original fall has left a profound devastation in all of us; it has since gutted everything. However, in spite of the inclinations of corrupted nature, the allurements of the senses, and the prejudices of education, your heart has remained stronger than your mind. No matter what you do, below all these evil layers which have superimposed themselves one after another through acts of sin and lies, there remains at the core of your being a nucleus, a germ, a power for good that nothing has been able to destroy. In a word, there rests in your heart a faculty and a need to love: a faculty which can never completely translate itself into action, a need which can never find its hunger totally filled, as long as your love does not move towards its infinite end. I declare and promise that it is impossible for you to genuinely place the heart which beats in your breast in opposition to the Heart of Jesus without it immediately being carried toward His Heart by this movement of love which is the essential act of religion, and which, in itself, constitutes the accomplishment of all the divine law of the Old and New Testament: "Diliges: You will love." This is why the Lord makes His tender invitation: "My son, give me thy heart" (Prov. 23:26), as though He were saying: Willingly I set aside all others. You will easily acknowledge, My son, that my spirit is above thine. Therefore, do not enter into a useless discussion with Me. For Me, I will always easily overcome your mind, if you want to give Me your heart completely: "Præbe, fili mi, cor tuum mihi: My son, give Me thy heart."

When you have withdrawn from Jesus Christ, you have withdrawn from your own heart. The Psalmist declared it thus: "Cor meum dereliquit me: My heart has abandoned me." Fugitives from this better portion of yourselves, come back, come back to your heart (Is. 66:8). Lord Jesus, You are the center and the magnet of hearts. Man will never place himself again under the inspirations of his own heart, without being carried back immediately to You.

The Catholic Faith is truly the religion of hearts, and the veneration of the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ is the substantial summary of all Catholicism. The One who dwells in inaccessible light in heaven, wanting to draw nearer to us, to proportion Himself to us, to bring Himself to our level, at our ability, has taken our nature, our flesh. He made Himself man, and being man, He had a heart. And we also, although brought out of nothingness and formed from mud, we have received and carry in ourselves a heart. Here is the Creator and the creature, heaven and earth, Heart to heart. All religion is summed up in this Heart-to-heart confrontation of God and man. Let us pray with the Church the invitatory of one of the most ancient offices of the Sacred Heart: "Deus ergo nos apponentem Cor suum, venite adoremus: God, in the Person of Jesus Christ, His Son, disposing His Heart to us, let us come and adore Him."

- From Œuvres Sacerdotales du Cardinal Pie, Choix de Sermons et d'Instructions de 1839 a 1849 ["Homily for the Closing of a Novena to the Sacred Heart of Jesus," VI, 609-614].
]]> <![CDATA[Cardinal Pie: Modern Debasements of the Idea of God]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=848 Sun, 17 Jan 2021 13:36:04 +0000 Stone]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=848 The Angelus - September 2003


Modern Debasements of the Idea of God
by Louis-Edouard-Désiré Cardinal Pie


The first chapter of Vatican I's dogmatic constitution on the Catholic Faith is entitled: "Of God Creator of All Things": De Deo rerum omnium creatore. Here, Gentlemen, the Holy Church fulfills what, since Jerusalem and Nicaea, it has always placed at the head of its doctrinal work and of its solemn professions of faith. Credo in Deum, says the Apostles' Creed; Credo in unum Deum, says the Nicene Creed. But today, God having been travestied, disfigured, denied, our Council lays down in all its light the revealed doctrine by which God has declared Himself to us: Sancta catholica apostolica romana Ecclesia credit et confitetur unum esse Deum verum et vivam, and the remainder that we will soon explain.

Indeed, the duty and the need of the Church is to confess God before everything. This is its duty. Like Christ who has established and sent it, the Church is born and lives only to render witness to the truth, and especially to the truth from which all the other truths have their origin and their support. The Church is therefore the witness of God, His herald, His perceptible voice.

The Church is at the same time His requirement. Because the abundance of the heart causes words to spring forth, and because the Church has received the Spirit of God, it has in it a plenitude of light, of life, of divine charity which urges it and obliges it to tell God to the world. "It believes and it confesses," Credit et confitetur. Alas! This time, it is more than a homage rendered; it is a reparation made and it is at the same time a remedy presented to men against an ill so frightful that it would seem to have been impossible.

St. John gives the description in the Apocalypse of a woman dressed in red, seated on a red beast, and he says that she is "full of names of blasphemy": plenam nominibus blasphemice.1 This woman represents the city of the reprobates, that Scripture calls also "Babylon,"2 and elsewhere "the church of those who plot evil,"3 or "the Synagogue of Satan."4 Born with sin, this society will continue up to the final judgment; it is consequently contemporaneous with all the centuries. Nevertheless, where the course of time and the movement of men and of things has caused society to pass amid so many vicissitudes, it has, so to speak, its golden ages, where everything lends assistance to it, where its reign is freer and more extended, and where it seems to triumph over the city of God. Hoec est hora vestra et potestas tenebrarum:5"This is the hour of the wicked and the power of darkness."

Will we accuse him for not being an enlightened judge, nor an accurate historian, the one who will say that our century, assuredly great by so many great works that God has accomplished, and by so many remarkable graces which He has deigned to lavish on it, has been for this city of the evil, nevertheless, a singularly propitious and favorable era? Among the liberties claimed, recognized, instituted, carried to a condition of necessity in the order of facts, as well as to the position of principles and of axioms in the order of ideas and of laws, we have had on the first rank the liberty of blasphemy.

This liberty of blasphemy has been diversely named. Like Satan, who is its father, the world is naturally and inevitably a liar. If it were obliged to speak clearly and to call things by their true name, it would be struck with impotence and with death: the truth kills it, and light is deadly to it. Lies, darkness, equivocations are necessary for it to live: lies and equivocations in actions, lies and equivocations in speech. This godless liberty has therefore called itself liberty of conscience, religious liberty, liberty of thought, liberty of the press; but, in fact and truly in right, it was the liberty of blasphemy. It has been amply used and we do not know if, since the origin of the world, we have blasphemed more. There has been learned blasphemy and ignorant blasphemy, jeering blasphemy and serious blasphemy, polite blasphemy and cynical blasphemy, peaceful blasphemy and passionate blasphemy: plenam nominibus blasphemiæ.

But what was bending and was progressively degenerating under the weight of these blasphemies was the true idea of God. We have made gods to our fancy; there has come into being gods of all sorts. We have the God who reigns and does not govern: God splendid and worthy of every respect, but without care for the world, and that the world can better honor only by considering itself too small to merit His attention and, all the more, His intervention. We have had the God-idea: absolute ideal, escaping by its very nature every definition, fleeing so much the more as we seek to comprehend it, and vanishing entirely as soon as we claim to have understood it. We have had the God-Being: the being who is, but who does not exist, who does not live, the God who does not think, nor want, nor judge, nor operate, seeing that these words signify a determination, and by that even a limit, a decrease, a contradiction, a negation of absolute being. There has been the God-progress, the God-aspiration; the God who is a boundless evolution, who tries His strength unceasingly to exist, who seeks to expand and to contain Himself, who tends by every means to His plentitude, to His perfection, to His happiness, to His last end, and who never arrives there because being by essence the infinite aspiration and the eternal progress, His life is moving without ever stopping and always aiming at an always impossible end: that reduces it exactly to the state of the damned. Neighbor and parent of the former, there has been the God-world, the God-cosmic: soul of the world, secret force, fatal, universal, vivifying everything, and if mingled with everything, it is distinct from nothing, and the world is its essential and unique expression. What should I say? There has been the God-nothingness, the God-evil, the God- hostile, jealous, tyrannical, oppressor: I stop.

You see it, Gentlemen, this is a pantheon of blasphemy: plenam nominibus blasphemiæ. But each of these blasphemous names has been given to God by our contemporaries, by our fellow-citizens, and that, more than one time, from the height of the chairs of public teaching. Each of these absurd and detestable ideas has taken the place of the rational and Catholic idea of God, and that even in baptized souls who even believed that they had not formally renounced their baptism.

After that, is it necessary to wonder at the degree of weakness, misery, and shame to which this society, ignorant and contemptuous of God has descended? The sage had said it well: "But all men are vain, in whom there is not the knowledge of God." Vani autem sunt omnes homines in quibus non subest scientia Dei.6 Do you hear? Vani omnes: whatever they may be and whatever advantages they glory in, these are no longer truly men, but shadows and phantoms of men, men who are no longer kept upright. They are inconsistent, fleeing, imperceptible men who, themselves, no longer know what to grasp nor to retain: a generation devoted to unhappiness, and which is reduced to look for its saviors among the dead, as if the dead could offer a hope of salvation: Infelices autem sunt, et inter mortuos spes illorum est.7 But if these people are taken away captive, if they are torn limb from limb, if they are delivered to the mercy of all their enemies from the outside and from the inside, the cause of it is that they have lost the key of all science and of all wisdom and the principle of all force by losing the knowledge of God: Propterea captivus ductus est populus meus, eo quod non habuerit scientiam this is why its leaders perish from starvation, and its multitudes, made thirsty for order and for peace, waste away in trouble and disorder: et nobiles ejus interierunt fame, et multitudo ejus siti exaruit.8 On account of that, the monster of revolutions, this anticipated hell, has enlarged its soul and opened its mouth without any bounds, and their strong ones and their high and glorious ones have descended into this abyss with the common people: Propterea dilatavit infernus animam suam, et aperuit os suum absque ullo termino: et descenderunt fortes ejus, et populus ejus, et sublimes gloriosique ejus, ad eum.9 Just chastisement by the outraged Divinity. Because He is no longer the unknown God10 of the pagans; He is the ignored God, and ignored by those whom He has instructed Himself, and whom He has honored with His divine adoption: Filios enutrivi et exaltavi; ipsi autem spreverunt me.11

It was therefore necessary,12 for the honor of God and for the salvation of souls, and for the deliverance of societies, it was necessary from the very first to affirm the true God, the only God, the living God, all powerful Creator, eternal, incomprehensible although perfectly knowable and truly known, infinite in His intelligence, infinite in His Will, infinite in His perfections, which are total perfection; a substance being one, sole, absolutely simple, and consequently spiritual, and by that immutable, truly and essentially distinct from the world. It was necessary to affirm of God that He has of Himself and in Himself the plentitude of His happiness: so much so that His happiness, no more than any of His perfections, is not susceptible to any increase; and that He lives, that He exists in a complete independence, at heights which go inexpressibly beyond everything that can, outside of Him, be or be conceived.

It was also necessary to affirm the truth of the perfect liberty, the absolute gratuitousness of the creative act. Without any doubt, this act and the entire universe that He produces manifest the divinity as every work manifests its author. Creation makes God known by the power that He displays, and by the astonishing beauty with which it has pleased Him to adorn it. Creation makes Him even be loved because of the innumerable goods with which He has deigned to bestow on it, and especially by the revelation that creation brings to us of this radical goodness which has inclined Him to create beings out of nothingness. In spite of that, strictly speaking, God does not have any personal interest here, He could not have any benefit, and His nature renders Him incapable of it. Why is it that this contingent glory, for which everything is made and everything had to be made, is not at all necessary to Him, is by itself of no usefulness to Him, is of no advantage? It is for us that He furnishes it, because, this glory consisting completely in that God may be known and loved and the creature being able to be perfect and happy only by this knowledge, it follows that our happiness derives from this exterior glory of God, and appears so much to determine our happiness that it finally becomes identified with it.

This is what a text of St. Hilary, often alleged by theologians to support the doctrine that we have just established, expresses marvelously: "God, [said the great Doctor], wants to be loved by us: not that God derives for Himself any fruit from our love; but this love much rather will profit us, we who will love Him": Amari se a nobis exigit: non utique amoris in se nostri fructum aliquem sui causa percipiens, sed amore ipso nobis potius, qui eum amabimus, profuturo. "The pouring out of the divine goodness, like the radiance of the sun, like the heat of fire, like the fragrance of a plant, is not useful to the one from whom it comes, but to the one who uses it": Bonitatis autem usus, ut splendor solis, ut lumen ignis, ut odor sued, non præbenti proficit, sed utenti.13

Finally, God having been affirmed and the world affirmed as a creature of God, it was necessary to establish their relationship and first the essential relationship on which are founded all the others. It has to be said, in short, that after creation, God and the world do not remain strangers from each other; that the dignity of God as well as His goodness, meaning His nature, obliges Him to incessantly watch and supremely govern the creatures upon whom He has spontaneously conferred existence; that He has His purpose, His plan, His laws, His powers, His resources, His works, and that, as there is nothing nor anyone which escapes His knowledge, there is nothing nor anyone who can be even, for an instant, outside of His reach, outside of His laws, outside of His Will.

1. Apoc. 17:3, 4.
2. Apoc. 17:5.
3. Ps. 25:5.
4. Apoc. 2:9; 3:9.
5. Lk. 22:53.
6. Wis. 13:1.
7. Wis. 13:10.
8. Is. 5:13.
9. Is. 5:14.
10. Acts, 17:23.
11. Is. 1:2.
12. Everything that follows is a paraphrase from the Vatican Constitution Dei Filius. We publish it here as the affirmation of the Catholic truth opposite the errors that Monsignor Pie has just denounced.
13. Hilary, Enarrat, on Ps. II, n. 15..

Translated exclusively for Angelus Press by Mr. & Mrs. William Platz from "Synodal Instruction on the 1st Vatican Constitution" (July 17, 1871. VII, 204-210), Pages choisies du Cardnal Pie (Paris: Librairie H. Oudin, 1916), pp. 103-110. The couple responded to an invitation in The Angelus for translators to make the work of Cardinal Pie, a mentor for Pope Pius X and Archbishop Lefebvre, available in English, for most of it is only known in French.

Louis-Edouard-Desire Cardinal Pie [say: "pea"] (1815-1880), renowned Bishop of Poitiers, France, was a major-league player in the fight against the anti-Catholic movement of the 19th century.

"...He is best known for his opposition to modern errors, and his championship of the rights of the Church. Regarding as futile the compromises accepted by other Catholic leaders, he fought alike all philosophical theories and political arrangements that did not come up to the full traditional Christian standard...." His distinguished service to the Church was recognized by Leo XIII, who made him cardinal in 1879. (From the Catholic Encyclopedia, vol.XII, 1913 ed., p. 76.)]]> The Angelus - September 2003


Modern Debasements of the Idea of God
by Louis-Edouard-Désiré Cardinal Pie


The first chapter of Vatican I's dogmatic constitution on the Catholic Faith is entitled: "Of God Creator of All Things": De Deo rerum omnium creatore. Here, Gentlemen, the Holy Church fulfills what, since Jerusalem and Nicaea, it has always placed at the head of its doctrinal work and of its solemn professions of faith. Credo in Deum, says the Apostles' Creed; Credo in unum Deum, says the Nicene Creed. But today, God having been travestied, disfigured, denied, our Council lays down in all its light the revealed doctrine by which God has declared Himself to us: Sancta catholica apostolica romana Ecclesia credit et confitetur unum esse Deum verum et vivam, and the remainder that we will soon explain.

Indeed, the duty and the need of the Church is to confess God before everything. This is its duty. Like Christ who has established and sent it, the Church is born and lives only to render witness to the truth, and especially to the truth from which all the other truths have their origin and their support. The Church is therefore the witness of God, His herald, His perceptible voice.

The Church is at the same time His requirement. Because the abundance of the heart causes words to spring forth, and because the Church has received the Spirit of God, it has in it a plenitude of light, of life, of divine charity which urges it and obliges it to tell God to the world. "It believes and it confesses," Credit et confitetur. Alas! This time, it is more than a homage rendered; it is a reparation made and it is at the same time a remedy presented to men against an ill so frightful that it would seem to have been impossible.

St. John gives the description in the Apocalypse of a woman dressed in red, seated on a red beast, and he says that she is "full of names of blasphemy": plenam nominibus blasphemice.1 This woman represents the city of the reprobates, that Scripture calls also "Babylon,"2 and elsewhere "the church of those who plot evil,"3 or "the Synagogue of Satan."4 Born with sin, this society will continue up to the final judgment; it is consequently contemporaneous with all the centuries. Nevertheless, where the course of time and the movement of men and of things has caused society to pass amid so many vicissitudes, it has, so to speak, its golden ages, where everything lends assistance to it, where its reign is freer and more extended, and where it seems to triumph over the city of God. Hoec est hora vestra et potestas tenebrarum:5"This is the hour of the wicked and the power of darkness."

Will we accuse him for not being an enlightened judge, nor an accurate historian, the one who will say that our century, assuredly great by so many great works that God has accomplished, and by so many remarkable graces which He has deigned to lavish on it, has been for this city of the evil, nevertheless, a singularly propitious and favorable era? Among the liberties claimed, recognized, instituted, carried to a condition of necessity in the order of facts, as well as to the position of principles and of axioms in the order of ideas and of laws, we have had on the first rank the liberty of blasphemy.

This liberty of blasphemy has been diversely named. Like Satan, who is its father, the world is naturally and inevitably a liar. If it were obliged to speak clearly and to call things by their true name, it would be struck with impotence and with death: the truth kills it, and light is deadly to it. Lies, darkness, equivocations are necessary for it to live: lies and equivocations in actions, lies and equivocations in speech. This godless liberty has therefore called itself liberty of conscience, religious liberty, liberty of thought, liberty of the press; but, in fact and truly in right, it was the liberty of blasphemy. It has been amply used and we do not know if, since the origin of the world, we have blasphemed more. There has been learned blasphemy and ignorant blasphemy, jeering blasphemy and serious blasphemy, polite blasphemy and cynical blasphemy, peaceful blasphemy and passionate blasphemy: plenam nominibus blasphemiæ.

But what was bending and was progressively degenerating under the weight of these blasphemies was the true idea of God. We have made gods to our fancy; there has come into being gods of all sorts. We have the God who reigns and does not govern: God splendid and worthy of every respect, but without care for the world, and that the world can better honor only by considering itself too small to merit His attention and, all the more, His intervention. We have had the God-idea: absolute ideal, escaping by its very nature every definition, fleeing so much the more as we seek to comprehend it, and vanishing entirely as soon as we claim to have understood it. We have had the God-Being: the being who is, but who does not exist, who does not live, the God who does not think, nor want, nor judge, nor operate, seeing that these words signify a determination, and by that even a limit, a decrease, a contradiction, a negation of absolute being. There has been the God-progress, the God-aspiration; the God who is a boundless evolution, who tries His strength unceasingly to exist, who seeks to expand and to contain Himself, who tends by every means to His plentitude, to His perfection, to His happiness, to His last end, and who never arrives there because being by essence the infinite aspiration and the eternal progress, His life is moving without ever stopping and always aiming at an always impossible end: that reduces it exactly to the state of the damned. Neighbor and parent of the former, there has been the God-world, the God-cosmic: soul of the world, secret force, fatal, universal, vivifying everything, and if mingled with everything, it is distinct from nothing, and the world is its essential and unique expression. What should I say? There has been the God-nothingness, the God-evil, the God- hostile, jealous, tyrannical, oppressor: I stop.

You see it, Gentlemen, this is a pantheon of blasphemy: plenam nominibus blasphemiæ. But each of these blasphemous names has been given to God by our contemporaries, by our fellow-citizens, and that, more than one time, from the height of the chairs of public teaching. Each of these absurd and detestable ideas has taken the place of the rational and Catholic idea of God, and that even in baptized souls who even believed that they had not formally renounced their baptism.

After that, is it necessary to wonder at the degree of weakness, misery, and shame to which this society, ignorant and contemptuous of God has descended? The sage had said it well: "But all men are vain, in whom there is not the knowledge of God." Vani autem sunt omnes homines in quibus non subest scientia Dei.6 Do you hear? Vani omnes: whatever they may be and whatever advantages they glory in, these are no longer truly men, but shadows and phantoms of men, men who are no longer kept upright. They are inconsistent, fleeing, imperceptible men who, themselves, no longer know what to grasp nor to retain: a generation devoted to unhappiness, and which is reduced to look for its saviors among the dead, as if the dead could offer a hope of salvation: Infelices autem sunt, et inter mortuos spes illorum est.7 But if these people are taken away captive, if they are torn limb from limb, if they are delivered to the mercy of all their enemies from the outside and from the inside, the cause of it is that they have lost the key of all science and of all wisdom and the principle of all force by losing the knowledge of God: Propterea captivus ductus est populus meus, eo quod non habuerit scientiam this is why its leaders perish from starvation, and its multitudes, made thirsty for order and for peace, waste away in trouble and disorder: et nobiles ejus interierunt fame, et multitudo ejus siti exaruit.8 On account of that, the monster of revolutions, this anticipated hell, has enlarged its soul and opened its mouth without any bounds, and their strong ones and their high and glorious ones have descended into this abyss with the common people: Propterea dilatavit infernus animam suam, et aperuit os suum absque ullo termino: et descenderunt fortes ejus, et populus ejus, et sublimes gloriosique ejus, ad eum.9 Just chastisement by the outraged Divinity. Because He is no longer the unknown God10 of the pagans; He is the ignored God, and ignored by those whom He has instructed Himself, and whom He has honored with His divine adoption: Filios enutrivi et exaltavi; ipsi autem spreverunt me.11

It was therefore necessary,12 for the honor of God and for the salvation of souls, and for the deliverance of societies, it was necessary from the very first to affirm the true God, the only God, the living God, all powerful Creator, eternal, incomprehensible although perfectly knowable and truly known, infinite in His intelligence, infinite in His Will, infinite in His perfections, which are total perfection; a substance being one, sole, absolutely simple, and consequently spiritual, and by that immutable, truly and essentially distinct from the world. It was necessary to affirm of God that He has of Himself and in Himself the plentitude of His happiness: so much so that His happiness, no more than any of His perfections, is not susceptible to any increase; and that He lives, that He exists in a complete independence, at heights which go inexpressibly beyond everything that can, outside of Him, be or be conceived.

It was also necessary to affirm the truth of the perfect liberty, the absolute gratuitousness of the creative act. Without any doubt, this act and the entire universe that He produces manifest the divinity as every work manifests its author. Creation makes God known by the power that He displays, and by the astonishing beauty with which it has pleased Him to adorn it. Creation makes Him even be loved because of the innumerable goods with which He has deigned to bestow on it, and especially by the revelation that creation brings to us of this radical goodness which has inclined Him to create beings out of nothingness. In spite of that, strictly speaking, God does not have any personal interest here, He could not have any benefit, and His nature renders Him incapable of it. Why is it that this contingent glory, for which everything is made and everything had to be made, is not at all necessary to Him, is by itself of no usefulness to Him, is of no advantage? It is for us that He furnishes it, because, this glory consisting completely in that God may be known and loved and the creature being able to be perfect and happy only by this knowledge, it follows that our happiness derives from this exterior glory of God, and appears so much to determine our happiness that it finally becomes identified with it.

This is what a text of St. Hilary, often alleged by theologians to support the doctrine that we have just established, expresses marvelously: "God, [said the great Doctor], wants to be loved by us: not that God derives for Himself any fruit from our love; but this love much rather will profit us, we who will love Him": Amari se a nobis exigit: non utique amoris in se nostri fructum aliquem sui causa percipiens, sed amore ipso nobis potius, qui eum amabimus, profuturo. "The pouring out of the divine goodness, like the radiance of the sun, like the heat of fire, like the fragrance of a plant, is not useful to the one from whom it comes, but to the one who uses it": Bonitatis autem usus, ut splendor solis, ut lumen ignis, ut odor sued, non præbenti proficit, sed utenti.13

Finally, God having been affirmed and the world affirmed as a creature of God, it was necessary to establish their relationship and first the essential relationship on which are founded all the others. It has to be said, in short, that after creation, God and the world do not remain strangers from each other; that the dignity of God as well as His goodness, meaning His nature, obliges Him to incessantly watch and supremely govern the creatures upon whom He has spontaneously conferred existence; that He has His purpose, His plan, His laws, His powers, His resources, His works, and that, as there is nothing nor anyone which escapes His knowledge, there is nothing nor anyone who can be even, for an instant, outside of His reach, outside of His laws, outside of His Will.

1. Apoc. 17:3, 4.
2. Apoc. 17:5.
3. Ps. 25:5.
4. Apoc. 2:9; 3:9.
5. Lk. 22:53.
6. Wis. 13:1.
7. Wis. 13:10.
8. Is. 5:13.
9. Is. 5:14.
10. Acts, 17:23.
11. Is. 1:2.
12. Everything that follows is a paraphrase from the Vatican Constitution Dei Filius. We publish it here as the affirmation of the Catholic truth opposite the errors that Monsignor Pie has just denounced.
13. Hilary, Enarrat, on Ps. II, n. 15..

Translated exclusively for Angelus Press by Mr. & Mrs. William Platz from "Synodal Instruction on the 1st Vatican Constitution" (July 17, 1871. VII, 204-210), Pages choisies du Cardnal Pie (Paris: Librairie H. Oudin, 1916), pp. 103-110. The couple responded to an invitation in The Angelus for translators to make the work of Cardinal Pie, a mentor for Pope Pius X and Archbishop Lefebvre, available in English, for most of it is only known in French.

Louis-Edouard-Desire Cardinal Pie [say: "pea"] (1815-1880), renowned Bishop of Poitiers, France, was a major-league player in the fight against the anti-Catholic movement of the 19th century.

"...He is best known for his opposition to modern errors, and his championship of the rights of the Church. Regarding as futile the compromises accepted by other Catholic leaders, he fought alike all philosophical theories and political arrangements that did not come up to the full traditional Christian standard...." His distinguished service to the Church was recognized by Leo XIII, who made him cardinal in 1879. (From the Catholic Encyclopedia, vol.XII, 1913 ed., p. 76.)]]> <![CDATA[Cardinal Pie: To Faint-Hearted Catholics]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=845 Sun, 17 Jan 2021 13:18:50 +0000 Stone]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=845 Cardinal Pie:

“Let us fight, hoping against hope itself, which is what I wish to tell faint-hearted Christians, slaves to popularity, worshippers of success and shaken by the least advance of evil. Given how they feel, please God they will be spared the agonies of the world’s final trial. Is that trial close or is it still far off? Nobody knows, and I will not dare to make a guess. But one thing is certain, namely that the closer we come to the end of the world, the more and more it is wicked and deceitful men who will gain the upper hand. The Faith will hardly be found on earth, meaning that it will almost have disappeared from earthly institutions. Believers themselves will hardly dare to profess their belief in public, or in society.

“The splitting, separating and divorcing of States from God which was for St Paul a sign foretelling the end, will advance day by day. The Church, while remaining always a visible society, will be reduced more and more to dimensions of the individual and the home. When She started out she said She was being shut in, and She called for more room to breathe, but as She approaches her end on earth, so She will have to fight a rearguard action every inch of the way, being surrounded and hemmed in on all sides. The more widely She spread out in previous ages, the greater the effort will now be made to cut her down to size. Finally the Church will undergo what looks like a veritable defeat, and the Beast will be given to make war on the Saints and to overwhelm them. The insolence of evil will be at its peak.”

“In such an extremity, in such a desperate state of affairs, where evil has taken over a world soon to be consumed in flames, what are all the true Christians to do, all good men, all Saints, all men with any faith and courage? Grappling with a situation more clearly impossible than ever, with a redoubled energy by their ardent prayer, by their active works and by their fearless struggles they will say, O God, O Father in Heaven, hallowed be thy name on earth as it is in Heaven, thy kingdom come on earth as it is in Heaven, thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. On earth as it is in Heaven! And they will still be murmuring these words while the very earth is giving way beneath their feet.

“And just as once upon a time, following upon an appalling military disaster the whole Roman Senate and State officials of all ranks could be seen going out to meet the defeated consul and to congratulate him on not having despaired of the Roman Republic; so likewise the senate of Heaven, all the Choirs of angels, all ranks of the Blessed will come out to meet the generous athletes of the Faith who will have fought to the bitter end, hoping against hope itself.

“And then that impossible ideal that the elect of all ages had obstinately pursued will become a reality. In his Second and final Coming the Son will hand over the Kingdom of this world to God his Father, the power of evil will have been cast out for ever into the depths of the abyss; whatever has refused to be assimilated and incorporated into God through Jesus Christ by faith, love and observance of the law will be flung into the sewer of everlasting filth. And God will live and reign for ever and ever, not only in the oneness of his nature and in the society of the three divine Persons, but also in the fullness of the Mystical Body of his Incarnate Son and in the fulfilment of the Communion of Saints!”

Source]]> Cardinal Pie:

“Let us fight, hoping against hope itself, which is what I wish to tell faint-hearted Christians, slaves to popularity, worshippers of success and shaken by the least advance of evil. Given how they feel, please God they will be spared the agonies of the world’s final trial. Is that trial close or is it still far off? Nobody knows, and I will not dare to make a guess. But one thing is certain, namely that the closer we come to the end of the world, the more and more it is wicked and deceitful men who will gain the upper hand. The Faith will hardly be found on earth, meaning that it will almost have disappeared from earthly institutions. Believers themselves will hardly dare to profess their belief in public, or in society.

“The splitting, separating and divorcing of States from God which was for St Paul a sign foretelling the end, will advance day by day. The Church, while remaining always a visible society, will be reduced more and more to dimensions of the individual and the home. When She started out she said She was being shut in, and She called for more room to breathe, but as She approaches her end on earth, so She will have to fight a rearguard action every inch of the way, being surrounded and hemmed in on all sides. The more widely She spread out in previous ages, the greater the effort will now be made to cut her down to size. Finally the Church will undergo what looks like a veritable defeat, and the Beast will be given to make war on the Saints and to overwhelm them. The insolence of evil will be at its peak.”

“In such an extremity, in such a desperate state of affairs, where evil has taken over a world soon to be consumed in flames, what are all the true Christians to do, all good men, all Saints, all men with any faith and courage? Grappling with a situation more clearly impossible than ever, with a redoubled energy by their ardent prayer, by their active works and by their fearless struggles they will say, O God, O Father in Heaven, hallowed be thy name on earth as it is in Heaven, thy kingdom come on earth as it is in Heaven, thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. On earth as it is in Heaven! And they will still be murmuring these words while the very earth is giving way beneath their feet.

“And just as once upon a time, following upon an appalling military disaster the whole Roman Senate and State officials of all ranks could be seen going out to meet the defeated consul and to congratulate him on not having despaired of the Roman Republic; so likewise the senate of Heaven, all the Choirs of angels, all ranks of the Blessed will come out to meet the generous athletes of the Faith who will have fought to the bitter end, hoping against hope itself.

“And then that impossible ideal that the elect of all ages had obstinately pursued will become a reality. In his Second and final Coming the Son will hand over the Kingdom of this world to God his Father, the power of evil will have been cast out for ever into the depths of the abyss; whatever has refused to be assimilated and incorporated into God through Jesus Christ by faith, love and observance of the law will be flung into the sewer of everlasting filth. And God will live and reign for ever and ever, not only in the oneness of his nature and in the society of the three divine Persons, but also in the fullness of the Mystical Body of his Incarnate Son and in the fulfilment of the Communion of Saints!”

Source]]> <![CDATA[Cardinal Pie: Doctrinal Intolerance]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=844 Sun, 17 Jan 2021 13:11:13 +0000 Stone]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=844 The Angelus - June 2002

Doctrinal Intolerance
by Louis-Edouard-Désiré Cardinal Pie



A sermon of the great Cardinal Pie, appearing here for the first time in English, which he preached twice at the Cathedral of Chartres in 1841 and 1847.
Unus Dominus, una fides, unam baptisma–There is only one Lord, only one Faith, only one baptism (Eph. 4:5).

A sage has said that the actions of man are the children of his thought, and we have established ourselves that all good things as well as all bad things in a society are the fruit of the good or bad maxims that it professes. Truth in the mind and virtue in the heart are things that correspond nearly inseparably; when the mind is delivered to the demonic lie, the heart, if by chance the obsession has not seized it first, is close to delivering itself to demonic vice. Intellect and Will are two sisters between which seduction is contagious; if you see that the first has given itself up to error, throw a veil on the honor of the second.

This is because it is so, my brethren, it is because there is no harm, no wrong in the intellectual order which would not have fatal consequences in the moral order and as well as in the material order, that we apply ourselves to fight the evil in its principle, to stop it at its source, that is to say, in the ideas. A thousand prejudices are spread amongst us: Sophism, astonished to hear its own voice attacked, invokes prescription; paradox flatters itself to have acquired citizenship and the freedom of the city. Christians themselves, living amidst this impure atmosphere, do not avoid all its contagion; they too easily accept many of the errors. Tired of resisting on the essential points, often for the sake of peace and quiet, they give way on other points which seem to them less important, and they do not always perceive, and sometimes they do not want to perceive how far they could be led by their imprudent weakness. Among this confusion of ideas and false opinions, it is up to us priests of the incorruptible truth to intervene and to protest with action and with our voice; fortunate we are if the rigid inflexibility of our teaching can stop the flood of error, dethrone erroneous principles which are reigning superbly in minds, correct deadly axioms which already assume authority with the sanction of time, finally enlighten and purify a society which threatens to sink, in growing old, into a chaos of darkness and of disorders where it would no longer be possible to distinguish the nature, and even less the remedy, of its ills.

Our century cries: Tolerance! Tolerance! It is acknowledged that a priest must be tolerant, that religion must be tolerant. My brethren, in all things nothing equals frankness; and I am here to tell you frankly that there only exists in the world one society which possesses the truth, and that this society necessarily has to be intolerant. But, before broaching the subject, for us to better understand, let's make distinction between things, let's agree on the meaning of the words, and let's not confuse anything.

Tolerance can be either civil or theological; the first does not fall within our province, I permit myself only a word in this respect. If the law wants to say that it permits all religions because in its eyes they are all equally good, or furthermore because public power is incompetent to come to a decision on this matter, the law is irreligious and atheistic. It no longer professes civil tolerance such as we are going to define it, but dogmatic tolerance, and, by a criminal neutrality it justifies in individuals the most absolute religious indifference. On the contrary, if recognizing that only one religion is good, it supports and permits only the peaceful exercise of the others, the law, in this, as it has been observed before me, can be wise and necessary according to the circumstances. If there are times when it is necessary to say with the famous high constable: One faith, one law; there are other times when it is necessary to say as Fenelon said to the son of James II: Grant civil tolerance to everyone, not by approving everything as indifferent, but by suffering with patience what God suffers."

But I abandon this rough field of difficulties, and adhering to the properly religious and theological question, I will set forth these two principles:

1) The religion which comes from heaven is truth, and it is intolerant toward doctrines;
2) The religion which comes from heaven is charity, and it is full of tolerance toward people....

It is of the essence of every truth not to tolerate the contradictory principle. The affirmation of one thing excludes the negation of this very same thing, as light excludes darkness. Where nothing is certain, where nothing is defined, the sentiments can be divided, opinions can vary. I understand and I ask liberty in doubtful things. But since the truth appears with positive traits which characterize it, for that very reason that it is truth, it is positive, it is necessary, and consequently, it is one and intolerant. To condemn truth to tolerance is to force it to suicide. Affirmation kills itself if it doubts of itself; and it doubts of itself if it leaves indifferently the negation to pose itself beside it. For truth, intolerance is the care for preservation, it is the legitimate exercise of the right of property. When one possesses, it is necessary to defend, under pain of being soon entirely despoiled.

Therefore, by the very necessity of things, intolerance is everywhere, because everywhere there is good and evil, true and false, order and disorder. Everywhere the true does not endure the false, the good excludes the bad, order combats disorder. What is more intolerant, for instance, than this proposition: 2 and 2 are 4? If you come to me to say that 2 and 2 are 3, or that 2 and 2 are 5, I reply to you that 2 and 2 are 4. And if you said to me that you do not contest my manner of counting, but that you maintain yours, and that you request me to be as indulgent toward you as you are toward me; while I remain convinced that I am right and that you are wrong, if absolutely necessary I might remain silent, because after all it concerns me little enough that there may be on earth a man for whom 2 and 2 are 3 or 5.

On a certain number of questions, where the truth would be less absolute, where the consequences would be less grave, I could, up to a certain point, compromise with you. I will be conciliatory, if you speak to me of literature, of politics, of art, of agreeable sciences, because in all these things there is not a unique and determined type. There, beauty and the true are more or less conventions....But if it concerns religious truth taught or revealed by God Himself; if it is a matter of your eternal future and of the salvation of your soul, then there is no more compromise possible. You will find me immovable, and I must be. It is the condition of every truth to be intolerant; but religious truth being the most absolute and the most important of all the truths, is consequently also the most intolerant and the most exclusive.

My brethren, nothing is as exclusive as unity. But listen to the word of Saint Paul: "One Lord, one faith, one baptism." There is in Heaven only one Lord. This God, of which unity is the great attribute, has given to the earth only one creed, one doctrine, one faith. And this faith, this creed, He has confided only to a single visible society, to one Church of which all children are marked by the same seal and regenerated by the same Grace: one baptism. Thus, divine unity, which resides for all eternity in the splendors of the glory, has occurred on earth by the unity of the Evangelical dogma, of which the deposit has been committed by Jesus Christ to the hierarchical unity of the priesthood for keeping: One God, one faith, one Church.

An English clergyman has had the courage to do a book on the tolerance of Jesus Christ, and the philosopher of Geneva1 has said in speaking of the Savior of men: "I do not see that my divine Master may have subtilized on dogma." Nothing is more true. Jesus Christ has not subtilized on dogma. He has brought the truth to men, and He has said: "If anyone is not baptized in the water and in the Holy Spirit; if anyone refuses to eat my Flesh and drink my Blood, he will not have part in my Kingdom." I acknowledge it, there is not subtlety there; it is intolerance, the most positive exclusion, the most frank. And further, Jesus Christ has sent His Apostles to preach to all nations, this is to say, to destroy all existing religions, to establish the single Christian religion throughout the world and to substitute the unity of Catholic dogma for all the beliefs received from the different peoples. And foreseeing the movements and divisions that this doctrine is going to excite on earth, He is not stopped, and He declares that He has come to bring not peace but the sword, to incite war not only between peoples, but in the bosom of the same family, and to separate, with regard to convictions at least, the believing spouse from the unbelieving spouse, the Christian son-in-law from the idolatrous father-in-law. The thing is true, and the philosopher is right: Jesus Christ has not subtilized on dogma.

[Jean-Jacques Rousseau] says elsewhere to his Emile: "I do as St. Paul, and I place charity well above faith. I think that the essential of religion consists in practice that not only is it necessary to be an upright man, humane and charitable, but that whoever is truly such, believes enough of it to be saved, whatever religion he professes." There is indeed, my brethren, a beautiful commentary of St. Paul which says, for instance, that without faith it is impossible to please God; of St. Paul who declares that Jesus Christ is not divided, that in Him there is not the yes and the no, but only the yes; of St. Paul who affirms that, when against all probability an angel would come to preach another doctrine than the apostolic doctrine, it would be necessary to say to him anathema. St. Paul, apostle of tolerance!? St. Paul, who marches throwing down all arrogant science which rises against Jesus Christ, converting all minds to the servitude of Jesus Christ.

People have spoken of the tolerance of the first centuries, of the tolerance of the Apostles. My brethren, we do not reflect on this; but the establishment of the Christian religion has been on the contrary, above all, a work of religious intolerance. At the time of the preaching of the Apostles, the entire universe possessed almost completely this so-praised dogmatic tolerance. As all religions were as false and unreasonable as the other, they were not waging war against each other; as all the gods were equal to each other, there were as many demons, they were not exclusive, they tolerated each other: Satan is not divided against himself. Rome, in multiplying its conquests, multiplied its divinities; and the study of its mythology became complicated in the same proportion as the one of its geography. The victor who was ascending to the Capitol had the conquered gods marched before him with more pride even than in the conquered kings he was dragging along in his retinue. Most often, by virtue of a decree of the Senate, the idols of the barbarians were henceforth identified with the domain of the country, and the national Olympus became greater as the empire did.

Christianity, ...at its first appearance, was not pushed aside all at once. Paganism wondered if, instead of fighting this new religion, it should not give it access into its midst. Judaea had become a Roman province. Rome, accustomed to receiving and to reconciling all religions, at first welcomed, without too much fright, the religion corning out of Judaea....But it did not take long for the word of the prophet to prove correct. The multitudes of idols, who usually saw without jealousy new and strange gods come to take their place near them, suddenly sent forth a cry of fright at the arrival of the God of the Christians, and...tottered on their threatened altars. Rome was attentive to this spectacle. And soon, when it noticed that this new God was the irreconcilable enemy of the other gods; when it saw that the Christians. whose religion they had accepted, did not want to admit the religion of the nation; in a word, when it had undeniably established the intolerant spirit of the Christian faith, it was then that the persecution began.

Listen to how the historians of the time justify the tortures of the Christians: they do not speak ill of their religion, of their God, of their Christ, of their practices; it was only later that they invented calumnies. They reproach them only for not being able to tolerate any other religion than theirs.

"I did not doubt," said Pliny the Younger, "whatever their dogma may be, it might be necessary to punish their stubbornness and their inflexible obstinacy."

These are not criminals, said Tacitus, but they are intolerant, misanthropes, enemies of mankind. There is in them a headstrong faith in their principles, and an exclusive faith which condemns the beliefs of all other peoples. The pagans were saying rather generally of the Christians what Celsus has said of the Jews, whom people confused with the Christians for a long time because the Christian doctrine had taken birth in Judaea:
Quote:"That these men adhered inviolably to their laws," this sophist said, "I do not blame them; I blame only those who abandon the religion of their fathers to embrace a different one! But if the Jews or the Christians want to give themselves the appearances of a wisdom more sublime than the one of the rest of the world, I will say that we do not have to believe that they are more agreeable to God than the others."

The principal grievance against the Christians was the too absolute rigidity of their creed, and, as people said, the unsociable disposition of their theology. If their God had been only one of many, there would not have been complaints: but it was an incompatible God who was driving away all the others. This is why the persecution. Thus, the establishment of the Church was a work of dogmatic intolerance, the whole history of the Church is likewise only the history of this intolerance. What are the martyrs? People intolerant in matters of the faith who preferred torture rather than to profess error. What is the Creed? Formulas of intolerance that regulate what it is necessary to believe and that impose on the reason necessary mysteries. What is the Papacy? An institution of doctrinal intolerance, which through hierarchal unity maintains the unity of the faith. Why the Councils? To stop deviations of thought, to condemn false interpretations of dogma, to anathematize propositions contrary to the Faith.

We are therefore intolerant, exclusive in matters of doctrine: we profess it; we are proud of it. If we were not, it would be because we do not have the truth, since truth is one, and consequently intolerant. Daughter of Heaven, the Catholic religion in descending onto the earth has produced titles of its origin; it has offered to the examination of reason incontestable facts that prove irrefragably its divinity. Now, if it comes from God; if Jesus Christ, its Author, has said: "I am the truth," it is certainly necessary by an inevitable consequence that the Catholic Church maintain incorruptibly this truth such as it has received it from Heaven itself. It is very necessary that it reject, that it exclude everything that is contrary to this truth, all that would destroy it. To reproach the Catholic Church its dogmatic intolerance, its absolute affirmation in matters of doctrine, is to address to it a very honorable reproach. It is to reproach the sentinel for being too faithful and too vigilant; it is to reproach the spouse for being too scrupulous and too exclusive.

"Since we tolerate you," the sects sometimes say to the Church, "why do you not therefore tolerate us?" My brethren, it is as if concubines said to the legitimate spouse, "Since we tolerate you, why be more intolerant than we?" The concubines tolerate the spouse, what a great favor (!), truly, and the spouse is very unreasonable to base her claim on rights and privileges solely belonging to her, of which the concubines reluctantly accept to leave her a share, at least until they may succeed in banishing her entirely!

Imagine this intolerance of the Catholics! People often say about us, "They can tolerate no other Church than theirs. The Protestants certainly tolerate them!" My brethren, you were in the peaceful possession of your home and your estate. Armed men hurl themselves at it. They seize your bed, your table, your money, in a word, they establish themselves in your home, but they do not drive you out of it. They carry condescension to the point of allowing you your share. What do you have to complain of? You are quite unreasonable not to be satisfied with the common law!

"Since the Protestants say that one can be saved in your Church," it is said, "why do you pretend that one cannot be saved in theirs?" My brethren, let's put ourselves in one of the public squares of this city. A traveler asks me the route which leads to the capital. I direct him to it. Then one of my fellow-citizens approaches, and says to me, "I acknowledge that that route leads to Paris, I grant you that. But you owe me the same consideration, and you will not dispute with me that this other route–the route to Bordeaux, for instance–leads also to Paris.

Indeed, this route to Paris would be very intolerant and very exclusive not to admit that a route which is directly opposite it would lead to the very same end. It does not have a conciliatory spirit. How far does encroachment and fanaticism creep? My brethren, truly I could give way again, because the most opposite routes would eventually meet each other perhaps, after having gone around the world, whereas one would eternally follow the road of error without ever arriving at heaven. Therefore, no longer ask us why, when the Protestants acknowledge that one can save himself in our religion, we object to recognizing that, generally speaking, and outside the case of good faith and of invincible ignorance, one can save himself in theirs. The thorns can acknowledge that the vine gives grapes without the vine having to acknowledge to the thorns the same properties.

My brethren, we are moreover often confused from what we hear said on all these questions from sensible people. The logic in them is entirely missing when religion is in question. Is it passion, is it prejudice which blinds them? It is both. In the main, the passions well know what they want when they seek to disturb the foundations of the faith, to place religion among the things without consistency. They are not ignorant that by demolishing dogma they prepare a facile morality. Someone has said with perfect accuracy: "It is rather the Ten Commandments than the Creed that makes unbelievers." If all religions can be placed on the very same rank, it is that they are all equal. If all are true, it is that all are false. If all the gods tolerate each other, it is that there is no God. And when we arrive at that conclusion, there no longer remains constraining morality. How many consciences would be at ease the day the Catholic Church would give the fraternal kiss to all the sects, its rivals!

Religious indifference is therefore a system which has its root in the passions of the human heart. But it is also necessary to say that, as regards a great many men of our century, it holds to the prejudices of education. Either it concerns these men...and who have imbibed the milk of the preceding generation, or better, it concerns those who belong to the new generation. The former have sought the philosophical and religious spirit in Jean-Jacques's Emile; the others, in the eclectic or progressive school of these half-protestant and half-rationalists who today hold sway over education.

Jean-Jacques has been among us the apologist and propagandist of this system of religious tolerance. The invention of it does not belong to him, although he has audaciously surpassed paganism, which never extended indifference as far. Here are, with a short commentary, the principal points of the Genevese Catechism, which unfortunately became popular: 
Quote:All religions are good; this is to say, otherwise for the French, all religions are bad. It is necessary to practice the religion of one's country; this is to say that truth in religious matters depends on the degree of longitude and of latitude: truth on this side of the mountains, untruth beyond the mountains. Consequently, what is still more serious, it is necessary either to have no sincere religion and to be the hypocrite everywhere, or if one has a religion in his heart, to become apostate and turncoat when the circumstances desire it. The wife has to profess the same religion as her husband, and the children the same religion as their father; this is to say what was false and bad before the marriage contract has to be true and good after, and that it would be bad for the children of the cannibals to turn aside from the estimable practices of their parents!

But I hear you tell me that the century of the Encyclopedia is past, that a longer refutation would be an anachronism. Very well, let's close the book on Education. Let's open in its place the learned Essays which are almost the common source from where the philosophy of the 19th century is poured out by a thousand faithful channels on the whole surface of our country. This philosophy is called eclectic, syncretic, and, with a small modification, it is also called progressive. This smart system consists in saying that there is nothing false, that all opinion and all religions can be reconciled, that error is not possible to man unless he despoils humanity, that every error of men consists in believing to possess exclusively all the truth, when each of them hold only a link of it and that from the union of all these links must form the entire chain of truth. Thus, according to this incredible theory, there are no false religions, but they are all incomplete without each other. The true religion would be the religion of the syncretic and progressive eclecticism, which would gather together all the others, past, present, and future. All the others, this is to say, the natural religion, which recognizes one God; Atheism, which does not recognize any; Pantheism, which recognizes God in everything and everywhere; Spiritualism, which believes in the soul, and Materialism, which believes only in the flesh, in the blood and in the temperament; evangelical societies which acknowledge a revelation, and rationalistic Deism, which spurns it; Christianity, which believes the Messiah came, and Judaism, which still waits for Him; Catholicism, which obeys the Pope, and Protestantism, which regards the Pope as the Antichrist. All this is reconcilable. These are different aspects of the truth. Combining these creeds will result in a larger, more vast religion, the great, truly catholic religion, this is to say universal, since it will include all the others in its midst!

My brethren, this doctrine, which you have all qualified absurd, is not my creation. It fills thousands of recent volumes and publications....Every day it takes new forms under the pen and on the lips of men... At what point of folly have we therefore arrived? We have arrived, My Brethren, where anyone must logically arrive whosoever does not admit this incontestable principle that we have established, namely, that truth is one and consequently intolerant, exclusive of all doctrine which is not its own. And to bring together again in a few words all the substance of this first part of my discourse, I will say to you: If you seek the truth on earth, seek the intolerant Church. All errors can make concessions to each other. They are close relations since they have a common father: "You are of your father, the devil." The Truth, daughter of heaven, is the only one which does not capitulate.

Therefore, you who want to judge this great cause, appropriate to yourself in this the wisdom of Solomon. Among these different societies between which the truth is an object of strife, as was that child between the two mothers, you want to know how to judge it. Ask for a sword, feign to slice, and examine the face that the claimants will make. There will be several of them who will be resigned, who will be contented with the part that is going to be handed over to them. Say immediately, "These are not the mothers." There is one of them on the contrary, who will deny herself every settlement, who will say, "The truth belongs to me and I have to preserve it in its entirety. I will never allow that it be diminished or parceled out." Say to this one, "This is the true mother."

Yes, Holy Catholic Church, you have the truth, because you have unity, and you are intolerant to allow this unity to decompose. There is our first principle: the religion which descends from heaven is true, and consequently it is intolerant with regard to doctrines. I will add: the religion which descends from heaven is charity, and consequently it is full of tolerance with regard to individuals...

It is the characteristic of the Catholic Church to be firm and immovable on principles and to prove itself to be kindly and indulgent in their application. What is so surprising? Is she not the spouse of Jesus Christ, and like Him, does she not possess both the intrepid courage of the lion and the gentleness of the lamb? Does she not represent on earth supreme Wisdom, which takes to its purpose strongly and which disposes everything benevolently? It is especially by this sign that the religion which descended from heaven has to make itself recognized. It is by the condescensions of its charity, by the inspirations of its love. Consider the Church of Jesus Christ, and see with what infinite regards, with what respectful attentions it acts with its children, either in the manner with which it presents its teachings to their comprehension, or in the application that it makes to their behavior and to their actions. Soon you will recognize that the Church is a mother who invariably teaches truth and virtue, who can never consent to error or to evil, but who busies herself to render her teaching amiable, and who treats with indulgence the errors of weakness.

...From the first steps that it has been given to me to make in the domain of sacred theology, what has caused in me the most admiration, what has spoken the most eloquently to my soul, what would have inspired in me the Faith if I had not had the good fortune to possess it already, is on the one hand, the tranquil majesty with which the Catholic Church affirms what is certain, and on the other hand the moderation and reserve with which it abandons to free opinions everything that is not defined. No, this is not as men teaching doctrines of which they are the inventors, this is not the way they express the thoughts that are the fruit of their genius.

When a man has created a system, he supports it with an absolute tenacity. He yields neither on one point nor on another. When he is enamored with a doctrine born from his brain, he seeks to make it prevail with authority. Do not contest a single one of his ideas with him. The one that you allow yourself to discuss is precisely the most important and the most necessary to him. Almost all the books issued from the hand of men are marked with this exaggeration and this tyranny... [T]he holy Catholic theology offers an entirely different character. Since the Church has not invented the truth, but is only the depository of it, we do not find passion nor excess in its teachings. It has pleased the Son of God, in whom resided the plenitude of truth,...to clearly reveal certain appearances, certain aspects of the truth and to show only a glimpse of the others. The Church does not extend her ministry further, and is content to have taught, maintained, avenged certain and necessary principles. It allows its children to discuss, to conjecture, to reason freely on the dubious points.

Catholic teaching has been calumniated so much...that you will perhaps hardly believe what I am going to tell you. There is not a single science in the world which is less despotic than the sacred science. The deposit of teaching has been confided to the Church, but do you know what the Church teaches? A creed in 12 articles which do not form 12 lines, a creed composed by the Apostles and that the first two General Councils have explained and developed by the addition of a few words which became necessary.

We proclaim, we Catholics, that the authentic interpretation of the Holy Scriptures belongs to the Church; but do you know, my brethren, in regards to how many of the verses of the Bible the Church has used this supreme right? The Bible includes about 30,000, and the Church has perhaps not defined the meaning of 80 of these verses. The remainder are left to the commentators, and I can say, to the free examination of the Catholic reader, so that, according to the word of St. Jerome, the Scriptures are a vast field in which the intellect can play and delight, and where it will meet only a few barriers here and there around precipices, and also a few fortified places where it will be able to retrench and to find an assured assistance.

The Councils are the principal organ for Catholic teaching. Now, the Council of Trent, wanting to include in a single and same declaration all the obligatory doctrine, had not needed two pages to contain the most complete profession of Faith. And if we study the history of this Council, we recognize with admiration that it was equally jealous to maintain dogmas and to respect opinions....

Finally, the incomparable Bossuet having opposed to the calumnies of the Protestants his well-known Exposition of the Catholic Faith, proved that this same Church, which was accused of tyrannizing intellects, could reduce its defined and necessary truths into a body of doctrine a great deal less voluminous than were the confessions, synods, and declarations of the sects that had rejected the principle of authority and were professing free examination.

But I repeat, my brethren, this remarkable phenomenon, which exists only in the Catholic Church, this tranquil majesty in its assertion, this moderation and reserve concerning all questions not defined, here is, in my opinion, the adorable sign by which I have to recognize the truth which came from heaven. When I contemplate this serene conviction and this kind indulgence on the face of the Church, I throw myself into its arms, and I say to it, "You are my mother." This is as a mother teaches–without passion nor exaggeration, but with calm authority and wise measure.

You recognize this character in the teaching of the Church, in its most eminent doctors, in those of whom it adopts and authorizes the writings nearly without restriction. Augustine undertakes his immortal work The City of God, which will be until the end of the ages one of the richest monuments of the Church. He goes about avenging the holy truths of the Catholic Faith against the calumnies of dying paganism. He feels the ardors of zeal boiling within him. But if he has read in the Scriptures that God is truth, he has also read that God is charity. He understands that excess of truth can become absence of charity. He places himself on his knees and he sends toward heaven this admirable prayer: "Send, Lord, send into my heart the consolation, the temperament of your spirit, so that carried away by the love of the truth I do not lose the truth of love."

And at the other extremity of the chain of holy doctors, listen to these beautiful words of the blessed Bishop of Geneva:2 "Truth which is not charitable ceases to be the truth because in God, Who is the supreme source of the true, charity is inseparable from the truth."

Read Augustine and Francis de Sales. You will find in their writings the truth in all its purity and, on account of this very thing, all imprinted with charity and love.

Oh, priest of Carthage,3 I admire the nerve of your energetic language, the irresistible power of your sarcasm, but...will I say it? under the surface of your most orthodox writings, I seek the unction of charity. Your incisive syllables do not have the humble and sweet expression of love. I fear that you were defending the truth as one defends a system to himself, and that one day your pride abandoned the cause that your bitter zeal had sustained. Why, having consecrated his immense talent to the service of the Gospel, has Tertullian not prayed to the Lord as Augustine did, to send into his heart the consolations, the temperaments of His spirit? Love would have maintained it in the doctrine. But because he was not in charity, he lost the truth....With more love in your heart, your intelligence would not have made such a deplorable defection; charity would have maintained you in truth.

If the Catholic Church presents to our minds the teaching of the truth with so much discretion and sweetness, it is with still more condescension and goodness that it applies its principles to our conduct and our actions. Incapable of ever supporting bad doctrines, the Church is tolerant without limit for people. It never mixes error with the one who teaches it, nor the sin with the one who commits it. The Church condemns error but continues to love the man. The Church brands sin but pursues the sinner with tenderness. It earnestly desires to make him better, to reconcile him with God, to call peace and truth into his heart.

The Church makes no preference of persons. There is for the Church neither Jew, nor Greek, nor barbarian. It is not interested in your opinions. It does not ask you if you live in a monarchy or in a republic. You have one soul to save; here is all that is necessary to save it. Call on the Church. It comes to you with hands full of graces and pardon. You have committed more sins than you have hairs on your head. That does not frighten it. It expunges everything in the blood of Jesus Christ. Some of its laws are too onerous for you, it consents to accommodate them to your weakness; their rigor yields before your failings. St. Thomas Aquinas poses in principle that if no one can dispense with the divine law, condescension to the laws of the Church on the other hand does not have to be too difficult, for the sake of the sweetness which makes the foundation of its government. When the civil law is rigid and inflexible, so much more is the law of the Church yielding and supple. What other authority over the earth governs or administers as the Church?

May the world which preaches tolerance to us be as tolerant as we. We reject only principles; the world rejects persons. How many times we forgive and the world continues to condemn! How many times, in the name of God, we have pulled the veil of oblivion over the past, and the world always remembers! The very same mouths which reproach us with intolerance, blame us for our too credulous and too easy benevolence. Our inexhaustible patience towards people is almost as impugned as our inflexibility against doctrines!

...[N]o longer ask us for tolerance with regard to doctrine. Encourage, on the contrary, our solicitude to maintain the unity of dogma, which is the only bond of peace on earth. The Roman orator has said, "The union of minds is the first condition for the union of hearts." And this great man showed even in the definition of friendship the unanimity of thought with regard to divine and human things.

Our society is prey to a thousand divisions. We complain of them everyday. Where does this weakening of affections come from, this coldness of hearts? My brethren, how should hearts be brought together where minds are so far apart? Because each of us lives alone in his own thought, each of us also confines himself to the love of himself. Do we want to put an end to these countless differences of opinion which threaten to soon destroy all the spirit of family, city, and country? Do we no longer want to be strangers to each other, adversaries and almost enemies? Let's come back again to one creed, and we will soon return to harmony and love.

Every creed concerning the things of here below is very far from us. A thousand opinions divide us and for a long time there has no longer been any human dogma. I do not know if it will ever reconstitute itself among us. Fortunately, the religious creed, the divine dogma, has always maintained itself in its purity in the hands of the Church, and that way a precious germ of salvation is preserved for us. The day when all men will say: "I believe in God, in Jesus Christ, and in the Church," all hearts will not delay to draw near, and we will find again the only truly solid and lasting peace, the one that the Apostle calls peace in truth. Amen.



Translated exclusively for Angelus Press by Mr. & Mrs. William Platz from OEuvres Sacerdotales du Cardinal Pie, Choix de Sermons et d'Instructions de 1839 a 1849. The couple responded to an invitation in The Angelus for translators to make the work of Cardinal Pie, a mentor for Pope Pius X and Archbishop Lefebvre, available in English, for most of it is only known in French.

Louis-Edouard-Desire Cardinal Pie [say: "pea"] (1815-1880), renowned Bishop of Poitiers, France, was a major-league player in the fight against the anti-Catholic movement of the 19th century. "...He is best known for his opposition to modern errors, and his championship of the rights of the Church. Regarding as futile the compromises accepted by other Catholic leaders, he fought alike all philosophical theories and political arrangements that did not come up to the full traditional Christian standard...." His distinguished service to the Church was recognized by Leo XIII, who made him cardinal in 1879. (From the Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913 ed., Vol. XII, p. 76.)

1. Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

2. St. Francis de Sales.

3. Tertullian.]]> The Angelus - June 2002

Doctrinal Intolerance
by Louis-Edouard-Désiré Cardinal Pie



A sermon of the great Cardinal Pie, appearing here for the first time in English, which he preached twice at the Cathedral of Chartres in 1841 and 1847.
Unus Dominus, una fides, unam baptisma–There is only one Lord, only one Faith, only one baptism (Eph. 4:5).

A sage has said that the actions of man are the children of his thought, and we have established ourselves that all good things as well as all bad things in a society are the fruit of the good or bad maxims that it professes. Truth in the mind and virtue in the heart are things that correspond nearly inseparably; when the mind is delivered to the demonic lie, the heart, if by chance the obsession has not seized it first, is close to delivering itself to demonic vice. Intellect and Will are two sisters between which seduction is contagious; if you see that the first has given itself up to error, throw a veil on the honor of the second.

This is because it is so, my brethren, it is because there is no harm, no wrong in the intellectual order which would not have fatal consequences in the moral order and as well as in the material order, that we apply ourselves to fight the evil in its principle, to stop it at its source, that is to say, in the ideas. A thousand prejudices are spread amongst us: Sophism, astonished to hear its own voice attacked, invokes prescription; paradox flatters itself to have acquired citizenship and the freedom of the city. Christians themselves, living amidst this impure atmosphere, do not avoid all its contagion; they too easily accept many of the errors. Tired of resisting on the essential points, often for the sake of peace and quiet, they give way on other points which seem to them less important, and they do not always perceive, and sometimes they do not want to perceive how far they could be led by their imprudent weakness. Among this confusion of ideas and false opinions, it is up to us priests of the incorruptible truth to intervene and to protest with action and with our voice; fortunate we are if the rigid inflexibility of our teaching can stop the flood of error, dethrone erroneous principles which are reigning superbly in minds, correct deadly axioms which already assume authority with the sanction of time, finally enlighten and purify a society which threatens to sink, in growing old, into a chaos of darkness and of disorders where it would no longer be possible to distinguish the nature, and even less the remedy, of its ills.

Our century cries: Tolerance! Tolerance! It is acknowledged that a priest must be tolerant, that religion must be tolerant. My brethren, in all things nothing equals frankness; and I am here to tell you frankly that there only exists in the world one society which possesses the truth, and that this society necessarily has to be intolerant. But, before broaching the subject, for us to better understand, let's make distinction between things, let's agree on the meaning of the words, and let's not confuse anything.

Tolerance can be either civil or theological; the first does not fall within our province, I permit myself only a word in this respect. If the law wants to say that it permits all religions because in its eyes they are all equally good, or furthermore because public power is incompetent to come to a decision on this matter, the law is irreligious and atheistic. It no longer professes civil tolerance such as we are going to define it, but dogmatic tolerance, and, by a criminal neutrality it justifies in individuals the most absolute religious indifference. On the contrary, if recognizing that only one religion is good, it supports and permits only the peaceful exercise of the others, the law, in this, as it has been observed before me, can be wise and necessary according to the circumstances. If there are times when it is necessary to say with the famous high constable: One faith, one law; there are other times when it is necessary to say as Fenelon said to the son of James II: Grant civil tolerance to everyone, not by approving everything as indifferent, but by suffering with patience what God suffers."

But I abandon this rough field of difficulties, and adhering to the properly religious and theological question, I will set forth these two principles:

1) The religion which comes from heaven is truth, and it is intolerant toward doctrines;
2) The religion which comes from heaven is charity, and it is full of tolerance toward people....

It is of the essence of every truth not to tolerate the contradictory principle. The affirmation of one thing excludes the negation of this very same thing, as light excludes darkness. Where nothing is certain, where nothing is defined, the sentiments can be divided, opinions can vary. I understand and I ask liberty in doubtful things. But since the truth appears with positive traits which characterize it, for that very reason that it is truth, it is positive, it is necessary, and consequently, it is one and intolerant. To condemn truth to tolerance is to force it to suicide. Affirmation kills itself if it doubts of itself; and it doubts of itself if it leaves indifferently the negation to pose itself beside it. For truth, intolerance is the care for preservation, it is the legitimate exercise of the right of property. When one possesses, it is necessary to defend, under pain of being soon entirely despoiled.

Therefore, by the very necessity of things, intolerance is everywhere, because everywhere there is good and evil, true and false, order and disorder. Everywhere the true does not endure the false, the good excludes the bad, order combats disorder. What is more intolerant, for instance, than this proposition: 2 and 2 are 4? If you come to me to say that 2 and 2 are 3, or that 2 and 2 are 5, I reply to you that 2 and 2 are 4. And if you said to me that you do not contest my manner of counting, but that you maintain yours, and that you request me to be as indulgent toward you as you are toward me; while I remain convinced that I am right and that you are wrong, if absolutely necessary I might remain silent, because after all it concerns me little enough that there may be on earth a man for whom 2 and 2 are 3 or 5.

On a certain number of questions, where the truth would be less absolute, where the consequences would be less grave, I could, up to a certain point, compromise with you. I will be conciliatory, if you speak to me of literature, of politics, of art, of agreeable sciences, because in all these things there is not a unique and determined type. There, beauty and the true are more or less conventions....But if it concerns religious truth taught or revealed by God Himself; if it is a matter of your eternal future and of the salvation of your soul, then there is no more compromise possible. You will find me immovable, and I must be. It is the condition of every truth to be intolerant; but religious truth being the most absolute and the most important of all the truths, is consequently also the most intolerant and the most exclusive.

My brethren, nothing is as exclusive as unity. But listen to the word of Saint Paul: "One Lord, one faith, one baptism." There is in Heaven only one Lord. This God, of which unity is the great attribute, has given to the earth only one creed, one doctrine, one faith. And this faith, this creed, He has confided only to a single visible society, to one Church of which all children are marked by the same seal and regenerated by the same Grace: one baptism. Thus, divine unity, which resides for all eternity in the splendors of the glory, has occurred on earth by the unity of the Evangelical dogma, of which the deposit has been committed by Jesus Christ to the hierarchical unity of the priesthood for keeping: One God, one faith, one Church.

An English clergyman has had the courage to do a book on the tolerance of Jesus Christ, and the philosopher of Geneva1 has said in speaking of the Savior of men: "I do not see that my divine Master may have subtilized on dogma." Nothing is more true. Jesus Christ has not subtilized on dogma. He has brought the truth to men, and He has said: "If anyone is not baptized in the water and in the Holy Spirit; if anyone refuses to eat my Flesh and drink my Blood, he will not have part in my Kingdom." I acknowledge it, there is not subtlety there; it is intolerance, the most positive exclusion, the most frank. And further, Jesus Christ has sent His Apostles to preach to all nations, this is to say, to destroy all existing religions, to establish the single Christian religion throughout the world and to substitute the unity of Catholic dogma for all the beliefs received from the different peoples. And foreseeing the movements and divisions that this doctrine is going to excite on earth, He is not stopped, and He declares that He has come to bring not peace but the sword, to incite war not only between peoples, but in the bosom of the same family, and to separate, with regard to convictions at least, the believing spouse from the unbelieving spouse, the Christian son-in-law from the idolatrous father-in-law. The thing is true, and the philosopher is right: Jesus Christ has not subtilized on dogma.

[Jean-Jacques Rousseau] says elsewhere to his Emile: "I do as St. Paul, and I place charity well above faith. I think that the essential of religion consists in practice that not only is it necessary to be an upright man, humane and charitable, but that whoever is truly such, believes enough of it to be saved, whatever religion he professes." There is indeed, my brethren, a beautiful commentary of St. Paul which says, for instance, that without faith it is impossible to please God; of St. Paul who declares that Jesus Christ is not divided, that in Him there is not the yes and the no, but only the yes; of St. Paul who affirms that, when against all probability an angel would come to preach another doctrine than the apostolic doctrine, it would be necessary to say to him anathema. St. Paul, apostle of tolerance!? St. Paul, who marches throwing down all arrogant science which rises against Jesus Christ, converting all minds to the servitude of Jesus Christ.

People have spoken of the tolerance of the first centuries, of the tolerance of the Apostles. My brethren, we do not reflect on this; but the establishment of the Christian religion has been on the contrary, above all, a work of religious intolerance. At the time of the preaching of the Apostles, the entire universe possessed almost completely this so-praised dogmatic tolerance. As all religions were as false and unreasonable as the other, they were not waging war against each other; as all the gods were equal to each other, there were as many demons, they were not exclusive, they tolerated each other: Satan is not divided against himself. Rome, in multiplying its conquests, multiplied its divinities; and the study of its mythology became complicated in the same proportion as the one of its geography. The victor who was ascending to the Capitol had the conquered gods marched before him with more pride even than in the conquered kings he was dragging along in his retinue. Most often, by virtue of a decree of the Senate, the idols of the barbarians were henceforth identified with the domain of the country, and the national Olympus became greater as the empire did.

Christianity, ...at its first appearance, was not pushed aside all at once. Paganism wondered if, instead of fighting this new religion, it should not give it access into its midst. Judaea had become a Roman province. Rome, accustomed to receiving and to reconciling all religions, at first welcomed, without too much fright, the religion corning out of Judaea....But it did not take long for the word of the prophet to prove correct. The multitudes of idols, who usually saw without jealousy new and strange gods come to take their place near them, suddenly sent forth a cry of fright at the arrival of the God of the Christians, and...tottered on their threatened altars. Rome was attentive to this spectacle. And soon, when it noticed that this new God was the irreconcilable enemy of the other gods; when it saw that the Christians. whose religion they had accepted, did not want to admit the religion of the nation; in a word, when it had undeniably established the intolerant spirit of the Christian faith, it was then that the persecution began.

Listen to how the historians of the time justify the tortures of the Christians: they do not speak ill of their religion, of their God, of their Christ, of their practices; it was only later that they invented calumnies. They reproach them only for not being able to tolerate any other religion than theirs.

"I did not doubt," said Pliny the Younger, "whatever their dogma may be, it might be necessary to punish their stubbornness and their inflexible obstinacy."

These are not criminals, said Tacitus, but they are intolerant, misanthropes, enemies of mankind. There is in them a headstrong faith in their principles, and an exclusive faith which condemns the beliefs of all other peoples. The pagans were saying rather generally of the Christians what Celsus has said of the Jews, whom people confused with the Christians for a long time because the Christian doctrine had taken birth in Judaea:
Quote:"That these men adhered inviolably to their laws," this sophist said, "I do not blame them; I blame only those who abandon the religion of their fathers to embrace a different one! But if the Jews or the Christians want to give themselves the appearances of a wisdom more sublime than the one of the rest of the world, I will say that we do not have to believe that they are more agreeable to God than the others."

The principal grievance against the Christians was the too absolute rigidity of their creed, and, as people said, the unsociable disposition of their theology. If their God had been only one of many, there would not have been complaints: but it was an incompatible God who was driving away all the others. This is why the persecution. Thus, the establishment of the Church was a work of dogmatic intolerance, the whole history of the Church is likewise only the history of this intolerance. What are the martyrs? People intolerant in matters of the faith who preferred torture rather than to profess error. What is the Creed? Formulas of intolerance that regulate what it is necessary to believe and that impose on the reason necessary mysteries. What is the Papacy? An institution of doctrinal intolerance, which through hierarchal unity maintains the unity of the faith. Why the Councils? To stop deviations of thought, to condemn false interpretations of dogma, to anathematize propositions contrary to the Faith.

We are therefore intolerant, exclusive in matters of doctrine: we profess it; we are proud of it. If we were not, it would be because we do not have the truth, since truth is one, and consequently intolerant. Daughter of Heaven, the Catholic religion in descending onto the earth has produced titles of its origin; it has offered to the examination of reason incontestable facts that prove irrefragably its divinity. Now, if it comes from God; if Jesus Christ, its Author, has said: "I am the truth," it is certainly necessary by an inevitable consequence that the Catholic Church maintain incorruptibly this truth such as it has received it from Heaven itself. It is very necessary that it reject, that it exclude everything that is contrary to this truth, all that would destroy it. To reproach the Catholic Church its dogmatic intolerance, its absolute affirmation in matters of doctrine, is to address to it a very honorable reproach. It is to reproach the sentinel for being too faithful and too vigilant; it is to reproach the spouse for being too scrupulous and too exclusive.

"Since we tolerate you," the sects sometimes say to the Church, "why do you not therefore tolerate us?" My brethren, it is as if concubines said to the legitimate spouse, "Since we tolerate you, why be more intolerant than we?" The concubines tolerate the spouse, what a great favor (!), truly, and the spouse is very unreasonable to base her claim on rights and privileges solely belonging to her, of which the concubines reluctantly accept to leave her a share, at least until they may succeed in banishing her entirely!

Imagine this intolerance of the Catholics! People often say about us, "They can tolerate no other Church than theirs. The Protestants certainly tolerate them!" My brethren, you were in the peaceful possession of your home and your estate. Armed men hurl themselves at it. They seize your bed, your table, your money, in a word, they establish themselves in your home, but they do not drive you out of it. They carry condescension to the point of allowing you your share. What do you have to complain of? You are quite unreasonable not to be satisfied with the common law!

"Since the Protestants say that one can be saved in your Church," it is said, "why do you pretend that one cannot be saved in theirs?" My brethren, let's put ourselves in one of the public squares of this city. A traveler asks me the route which leads to the capital. I direct him to it. Then one of my fellow-citizens approaches, and says to me, "I acknowledge that that route leads to Paris, I grant you that. But you owe me the same consideration, and you will not dispute with me that this other route–the route to Bordeaux, for instance–leads also to Paris.

Indeed, this route to Paris would be very intolerant and very exclusive not to admit that a route which is directly opposite it would lead to the very same end. It does not have a conciliatory spirit. How far does encroachment and fanaticism creep? My brethren, truly I could give way again, because the most opposite routes would eventually meet each other perhaps, after having gone around the world, whereas one would eternally follow the road of error without ever arriving at heaven. Therefore, no longer ask us why, when the Protestants acknowledge that one can save himself in our religion, we object to recognizing that, generally speaking, and outside the case of good faith and of invincible ignorance, one can save himself in theirs. The thorns can acknowledge that the vine gives grapes without the vine having to acknowledge to the thorns the same properties.

My brethren, we are moreover often confused from what we hear said on all these questions from sensible people. The logic in them is entirely missing when religion is in question. Is it passion, is it prejudice which blinds them? It is both. In the main, the passions well know what they want when they seek to disturb the foundations of the faith, to place religion among the things without consistency. They are not ignorant that by demolishing dogma they prepare a facile morality. Someone has said with perfect accuracy: "It is rather the Ten Commandments than the Creed that makes unbelievers." If all religions can be placed on the very same rank, it is that they are all equal. If all are true, it is that all are false. If all the gods tolerate each other, it is that there is no God. And when we arrive at that conclusion, there no longer remains constraining morality. How many consciences would be at ease the day the Catholic Church would give the fraternal kiss to all the sects, its rivals!

Religious indifference is therefore a system which has its root in the passions of the human heart. But it is also necessary to say that, as regards a great many men of our century, it holds to the prejudices of education. Either it concerns these men...and who have imbibed the milk of the preceding generation, or better, it concerns those who belong to the new generation. The former have sought the philosophical and religious spirit in Jean-Jacques's Emile; the others, in the eclectic or progressive school of these half-protestant and half-rationalists who today hold sway over education.

Jean-Jacques has been among us the apologist and propagandist of this system of religious tolerance. The invention of it does not belong to him, although he has audaciously surpassed paganism, which never extended indifference as far. Here are, with a short commentary, the principal points of the Genevese Catechism, which unfortunately became popular: 
Quote:All religions are good; this is to say, otherwise for the French, all religions are bad. It is necessary to practice the religion of one's country; this is to say that truth in religious matters depends on the degree of longitude and of latitude: truth on this side of the mountains, untruth beyond the mountains. Consequently, what is still more serious, it is necessary either to have no sincere religion and to be the hypocrite everywhere, or if one has a religion in his heart, to become apostate and turncoat when the circumstances desire it. The wife has to profess the same religion as her husband, and the children the same religion as their father; this is to say what was false and bad before the marriage contract has to be true and good after, and that it would be bad for the children of the cannibals to turn aside from the estimable practices of their parents!

But I hear you tell me that the century of the Encyclopedia is past, that a longer refutation would be an anachronism. Very well, let's close the book on Education. Let's open in its place the learned Essays which are almost the common source from where the philosophy of the 19th century is poured out by a thousand faithful channels on the whole surface of our country. This philosophy is called eclectic, syncretic, and, with a small modification, it is also called progressive. This smart system consists in saying that there is nothing false, that all opinion and all religions can be reconciled, that error is not possible to man unless he despoils humanity, that every error of men consists in believing to possess exclusively all the truth, when each of them hold only a link of it and that from the union of all these links must form the entire chain of truth. Thus, according to this incredible theory, there are no false religions, but they are all incomplete without each other. The true religion would be the religion of the syncretic and progressive eclecticism, which would gather together all the others, past, present, and future. All the others, this is to say, the natural religion, which recognizes one God; Atheism, which does not recognize any; Pantheism, which recognizes God in everything and everywhere; Spiritualism, which believes in the soul, and Materialism, which believes only in the flesh, in the blood and in the temperament; evangelical societies which acknowledge a revelation, and rationalistic Deism, which spurns it; Christianity, which believes the Messiah came, and Judaism, which still waits for Him; Catholicism, which obeys the Pope, and Protestantism, which regards the Pope as the Antichrist. All this is reconcilable. These are different aspects of the truth. Combining these creeds will result in a larger, more vast religion, the great, truly catholic religion, this is to say universal, since it will include all the others in its midst!

My brethren, this doctrine, which you have all qualified absurd, is not my creation. It fills thousands of recent volumes and publications....Every day it takes new forms under the pen and on the lips of men... At what point of folly have we therefore arrived? We have arrived, My Brethren, where anyone must logically arrive whosoever does not admit this incontestable principle that we have established, namely, that truth is one and consequently intolerant, exclusive of all doctrine which is not its own. And to bring together again in a few words all the substance of this first part of my discourse, I will say to you: If you seek the truth on earth, seek the intolerant Church. All errors can make concessions to each other. They are close relations since they have a common father: "You are of your father, the devil." The Truth, daughter of heaven, is the only one which does not capitulate.

Therefore, you who want to judge this great cause, appropriate to yourself in this the wisdom of Solomon. Among these different societies between which the truth is an object of strife, as was that child between the two mothers, you want to know how to judge it. Ask for a sword, feign to slice, and examine the face that the claimants will make. There will be several of them who will be resigned, who will be contented with the part that is going to be handed over to them. Say immediately, "These are not the mothers." There is one of them on the contrary, who will deny herself every settlement, who will say, "The truth belongs to me and I have to preserve it in its entirety. I will never allow that it be diminished or parceled out." Say to this one, "This is the true mother."

Yes, Holy Catholic Church, you have the truth, because you have unity, and you are intolerant to allow this unity to decompose. There is our first principle: the religion which descends from heaven is true, and consequently it is intolerant with regard to doctrines. I will add: the religion which descends from heaven is charity, and consequently it is full of tolerance with regard to individuals...

It is the characteristic of the Catholic Church to be firm and immovable on principles and to prove itself to be kindly and indulgent in their application. What is so surprising? Is she not the spouse of Jesus Christ, and like Him, does she not possess both the intrepid courage of the lion and the gentleness of the lamb? Does she not represent on earth supreme Wisdom, which takes to its purpose strongly and which disposes everything benevolently? It is especially by this sign that the religion which descended from heaven has to make itself recognized. It is by the condescensions of its charity, by the inspirations of its love. Consider the Church of Jesus Christ, and see with what infinite regards, with what respectful attentions it acts with its children, either in the manner with which it presents its teachings to their comprehension, or in the application that it makes to their behavior and to their actions. Soon you will recognize that the Church is a mother who invariably teaches truth and virtue, who can never consent to error or to evil, but who busies herself to render her teaching amiable, and who treats with indulgence the errors of weakness.

...From the first steps that it has been given to me to make in the domain of sacred theology, what has caused in me the most admiration, what has spoken the most eloquently to my soul, what would have inspired in me the Faith if I had not had the good fortune to possess it already, is on the one hand, the tranquil majesty with which the Catholic Church affirms what is certain, and on the other hand the moderation and reserve with which it abandons to free opinions everything that is not defined. No, this is not as men teaching doctrines of which they are the inventors, this is not the way they express the thoughts that are the fruit of their genius.

When a man has created a system, he supports it with an absolute tenacity. He yields neither on one point nor on another. When he is enamored with a doctrine born from his brain, he seeks to make it prevail with authority. Do not contest a single one of his ideas with him. The one that you allow yourself to discuss is precisely the most important and the most necessary to him. Almost all the books issued from the hand of men are marked with this exaggeration and this tyranny... [T]he holy Catholic theology offers an entirely different character. Since the Church has not invented the truth, but is only the depository of it, we do not find passion nor excess in its teachings. It has pleased the Son of God, in whom resided the plenitude of truth,...to clearly reveal certain appearances, certain aspects of the truth and to show only a glimpse of the others. The Church does not extend her ministry further, and is content to have taught, maintained, avenged certain and necessary principles. It allows its children to discuss, to conjecture, to reason freely on the dubious points.

Catholic teaching has been calumniated so much...that you will perhaps hardly believe what I am going to tell you. There is not a single science in the world which is less despotic than the sacred science. The deposit of teaching has been confided to the Church, but do you know what the Church teaches? A creed in 12 articles which do not form 12 lines, a creed composed by the Apostles and that the first two General Councils have explained and developed by the addition of a few words which became necessary.

We proclaim, we Catholics, that the authentic interpretation of the Holy Scriptures belongs to the Church; but do you know, my brethren, in regards to how many of the verses of the Bible the Church has used this supreme right? The Bible includes about 30,000, and the Church has perhaps not defined the meaning of 80 of these verses. The remainder are left to the commentators, and I can say, to the free examination of the Catholic reader, so that, according to the word of St. Jerome, the Scriptures are a vast field in which the intellect can play and delight, and where it will meet only a few barriers here and there around precipices, and also a few fortified places where it will be able to retrench and to find an assured assistance.

The Councils are the principal organ for Catholic teaching. Now, the Council of Trent, wanting to include in a single and same declaration all the obligatory doctrine, had not needed two pages to contain the most complete profession of Faith. And if we study the history of this Council, we recognize with admiration that it was equally jealous to maintain dogmas and to respect opinions....

Finally, the incomparable Bossuet having opposed to the calumnies of the Protestants his well-known Exposition of the Catholic Faith, proved that this same Church, which was accused of tyrannizing intellects, could reduce its defined and necessary truths into a body of doctrine a great deal less voluminous than were the confessions, synods, and declarations of the sects that had rejected the principle of authority and were professing free examination.

But I repeat, my brethren, this remarkable phenomenon, which exists only in the Catholic Church, this tranquil majesty in its assertion, this moderation and reserve concerning all questions not defined, here is, in my opinion, the adorable sign by which I have to recognize the truth which came from heaven. When I contemplate this serene conviction and this kind indulgence on the face of the Church, I throw myself into its arms, and I say to it, "You are my mother." This is as a mother teaches–without passion nor exaggeration, but with calm authority and wise measure.

You recognize this character in the teaching of the Church, in its most eminent doctors, in those of whom it adopts and authorizes the writings nearly without restriction. Augustine undertakes his immortal work The City of God, which will be until the end of the ages one of the richest monuments of the Church. He goes about avenging the holy truths of the Catholic Faith against the calumnies of dying paganism. He feels the ardors of zeal boiling within him. But if he has read in the Scriptures that God is truth, he has also read that God is charity. He understands that excess of truth can become absence of charity. He places himself on his knees and he sends toward heaven this admirable prayer: "Send, Lord, send into my heart the consolation, the temperament of your spirit, so that carried away by the love of the truth I do not lose the truth of love."

And at the other extremity of the chain of holy doctors, listen to these beautiful words of the blessed Bishop of Geneva:2 "Truth which is not charitable ceases to be the truth because in God, Who is the supreme source of the true, charity is inseparable from the truth."

Read Augustine and Francis de Sales. You will find in their writings the truth in all its purity and, on account of this very thing, all imprinted with charity and love.

Oh, priest of Carthage,3 I admire the nerve of your energetic language, the irresistible power of your sarcasm, but...will I say it? under the surface of your most orthodox writings, I seek the unction of charity. Your incisive syllables do not have the humble and sweet expression of love. I fear that you were defending the truth as one defends a system to himself, and that one day your pride abandoned the cause that your bitter zeal had sustained. Why, having consecrated his immense talent to the service of the Gospel, has Tertullian not prayed to the Lord as Augustine did, to send into his heart the consolations, the temperaments of His spirit? Love would have maintained it in the doctrine. But because he was not in charity, he lost the truth....With more love in your heart, your intelligence would not have made such a deplorable defection; charity would have maintained you in truth.

If the Catholic Church presents to our minds the teaching of the truth with so much discretion and sweetness, it is with still more condescension and goodness that it applies its principles to our conduct and our actions. Incapable of ever supporting bad doctrines, the Church is tolerant without limit for people. It never mixes error with the one who teaches it, nor the sin with the one who commits it. The Church condemns error but continues to love the man. The Church brands sin but pursues the sinner with tenderness. It earnestly desires to make him better, to reconcile him with God, to call peace and truth into his heart.

The Church makes no preference of persons. There is for the Church neither Jew, nor Greek, nor barbarian. It is not interested in your opinions. It does not ask you if you live in a monarchy or in a republic. You have one soul to save; here is all that is necessary to save it. Call on the Church. It comes to you with hands full of graces and pardon. You have committed more sins than you have hairs on your head. That does not frighten it. It expunges everything in the blood of Jesus Christ. Some of its laws are too onerous for you, it consents to accommodate them to your weakness; their rigor yields before your failings. St. Thomas Aquinas poses in principle that if no one can dispense with the divine law, condescension to the laws of the Church on the other hand does not have to be too difficult, for the sake of the sweetness which makes the foundation of its government. When the civil law is rigid and inflexible, so much more is the law of the Church yielding and supple. What other authority over the earth governs or administers as the Church?

May the world which preaches tolerance to us be as tolerant as we. We reject only principles; the world rejects persons. How many times we forgive and the world continues to condemn! How many times, in the name of God, we have pulled the veil of oblivion over the past, and the world always remembers! The very same mouths which reproach us with intolerance, blame us for our too credulous and too easy benevolence. Our inexhaustible patience towards people is almost as impugned as our inflexibility against doctrines!

...[N]o longer ask us for tolerance with regard to doctrine. Encourage, on the contrary, our solicitude to maintain the unity of dogma, which is the only bond of peace on earth. The Roman orator has said, "The union of minds is the first condition for the union of hearts." And this great man showed even in the definition of friendship the unanimity of thought with regard to divine and human things.

Our society is prey to a thousand divisions. We complain of them everyday. Where does this weakening of affections come from, this coldness of hearts? My brethren, how should hearts be brought together where minds are so far apart? Because each of us lives alone in his own thought, each of us also confines himself to the love of himself. Do we want to put an end to these countless differences of opinion which threaten to soon destroy all the spirit of family, city, and country? Do we no longer want to be strangers to each other, adversaries and almost enemies? Let's come back again to one creed, and we will soon return to harmony and love.

Every creed concerning the things of here below is very far from us. A thousand opinions divide us and for a long time there has no longer been any human dogma. I do not know if it will ever reconstitute itself among us. Fortunately, the religious creed, the divine dogma, has always maintained itself in its purity in the hands of the Church, and that way a precious germ of salvation is preserved for us. The day when all men will say: "I believe in God, in Jesus Christ, and in the Church," all hearts will not delay to draw near, and we will find again the only truly solid and lasting peace, the one that the Apostle calls peace in truth. Amen.



Translated exclusively for Angelus Press by Mr. & Mrs. William Platz from OEuvres Sacerdotales du Cardinal Pie, Choix de Sermons et d'Instructions de 1839 a 1849. The couple responded to an invitation in The Angelus for translators to make the work of Cardinal Pie, a mentor for Pope Pius X and Archbishop Lefebvre, available in English, for most of it is only known in French.

Louis-Edouard-Desire Cardinal Pie [say: "pea"] (1815-1880), renowned Bishop of Poitiers, France, was a major-league player in the fight against the anti-Catholic movement of the 19th century. "...He is best known for his opposition to modern errors, and his championship of the rights of the Church. Regarding as futile the compromises accepted by other Catholic leaders, he fought alike all philosophical theories and political arrangements that did not come up to the full traditional Christian standard...." His distinguished service to the Church was recognized by Leo XIII, who made him cardinal in 1879. (From the Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913 ed., Vol. XII, p. 76.)

1. Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

2. St. Francis de Sales.

3. Tertullian.]]> <![CDATA[Pope St. Pius X and Cardinal Pie]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=41 Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:12:06 +0000 Stone]]> https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=41 PIUS X AND CARDINAL PIE

Angelus Online 2004


May 18, 2004, is the 124th anniversary of the death of a man profoundly devoted to the Virgin Mary. He summed up his love for the Blessed Virgin in his episcopal motto: "Tuus sum ego–I am thine," and he had depicted on his episcopal coat of arms Our Lady of Chartres. He was a great servant of the Church. I am speaking of the Bishop of Poitiers, Cardinal Louis-Edouard Pie (1815-80).

Even after his death, we can nonetheless affirm that he was to speak again by the mouth of a pope–Pope St. Pius X.1 As a matter of fact, we know that Monsignor Giuseppe Sarto became familiar with the French language by reading the works of Cardinal Pie. Is that really all he drew from them?

Pope Pius X never hid his admiration for Cardinal Pie, who was probably the greatest French bishop of the 19th century. The posthumous influence that he was to exercise on Pius X does even more credit to his teaching. On March 1, 1912, he gratified the cathedral of Poitiers with the title of minor basilica, a tribute which revealed what was in his heart, as Canon Etienne Catta remarks in his book The Social and Political Doctrine of Cardinal Pie.2 To Cardinal Pie, Pope Pius X rendered homage that day when he referred to St. Hilary, Doctor of the Church:

Quote:The intrepid champion of the divinity of Christ against the Arians, but alongside of him it is sweet to remember Louis-Edouard Pie, cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, who, like a second Hilary–alter Hilarius–avenged the integrity of the Faith against the modern Arians by his victorious eloquence.3

Canon Vigué recounts in the introduction to his Selected Writings of Cardinal Pie4 that one day a priest from the diocese of Poitiers had the honor of being received into the office of Pope Pius X:

Quote:"Oh! The diocese of Cardinal Pie," said the Holy Father, raising his arms as soon as he had heard the name of Poitiers. "I have the works of your cardinal right here, and for years hardly a day has gone by that I haven't read a few pages."

As he spoke, he took one of the volumes and put it in the hands of his visitors. These could tell, by the wear on the binding, that they must have belonged to the parish priest of Salzano or the spiritual director of the seminary of Treviso long before entering the Vatican.

"As soon as I can snatch a few moments," admitted Pius X on another occasion, "I read something by your great cardinal, Cardinal Pie. He is my mentor."5

Pope Pius X was imbued with the writings of the Bishop of Poitiers and many times, in his pontifical acts, the Pope was to cite him without giving his name. The four examples that follow will try to prove this fact: I) The famous "prophecy" concerning France's future; II) The first pages of his first encyclical, E Supremi Apostolatus; III) The prayer of Pope Pius X to the Immaculate Conception; IV) A final example; V) Conclusion.


"Prophecy for France"

This "prophecy" of Pope Pius X has been published often.6 It was pronounced November 29, 1911, during the allocution Vi Ringrazio, which was a response to Cardinal Falconio, after the creation of several new cardinals, among whom were numbered three Frenchmen distinguished in the battle against modernism: Cardinals Cabrieres, Dubillard, and Billot. The Pope's discourse was not an improvisation; it had been written out by the Pope beforehand. Cardinal Merry del Val testified to the fact before the bishop of Laval during an audience; the latter referred to it in his Religious Week [Semaine Religieuse], July 29, 1917. The letter itself, if not its spirit, had been drawn from the works of Cardinal Pie. Some support for this claim is found in Cardinal Pie's homily when he took possession of his titular see of Santa Maria della Vittoria, in Rome (Sept. 28, 1879)–the very homily printed in the last volume of his episcopal writings7 (Vol. X, pp. 63-64).

The thought of Cardinal Pie, which became a "prophecy" in the mouth of St. Pius X, was present in his mind when a parish priest, then bishop, and at last a cardinal, that is to say, during his entire life. This is proven by his sermon "On the Duty of Society as a Whole to Turn Itself Toward God" which he gave in the cathedral of Chartres (Mar. 1, 1846) and the funeral sermon for General de La Moriciere, delivered in the cathedral of Poitiers (Dec. 5, 1865) and published in the episcopal works Oeuvres de Monseigneur l'eveque de Poitiers. It is probably from here that Pius X drew his "prophetic inspiration."


T
[Image: pius-X.jpg]


Pope St. Pius X

[Image: cardinal-pie.jpg]

Cardinal Pie


What follows is the text of Cardinal Pie which was known to Pope Pius X, with his "prophecy" in the column facing it; then the main passages of Pius X's first encyclical, across from passages of Cardinal Pie's first pastoral letter which are most likely their origin. Finally, we reprint Pope Pius X's prayer to the Immaculate Virgin which reads very much like its probable source, Cardinal Pie's prayer to the Immaculate Virgin:


Comparison of the Texts


I. The "Prophecy" Concerning France

This "prophecy" of Pope Pius X had been formulated a second time by Cardinal Pie (Dec. 5, 1864). It is clearly from this text that the Pope drew his inspiration.


Cardinal Pie
Text of Card. Pie (Dec. 5, 1864)8
"God holds in his hands the hearts of peoples as well as the hearts of men. Courage, O France: thus you will return to your first vocation. Precious instincts, which yet escape you, but which are only asleep, will awaken in your breast.
"And even as, like Saul, still breathing threats and slaughter on the road to Damascus, you seem perhaps to be engaged in the way of impiety and violence, suddenly a secret force will throw you to the ground, a blinding light will shine about you, and a voice will be heard: "Who art thou?" you will cry: "Quis es, Domine?' "I am Jesus, whom you pursue, whom you persecute: Ego sum Jesus quem tu persequeris." O France, it is hard for you to kick against the goad. To make war on God is not in your nature. Rise up, predestined race, vessel of election, and go, as in the past, carry my name to all peoples and to all the kings of the earth."
Pope St. Pius X
The allocution Vi Ringrazio
(Nov. 29, 1911)9
"What shall I say to you now, dear sons of France, who groan beneath the weight of persecution? The people who made an alliance with God at the baptismal font of Rheims will repent and return to its first vocation. Her faults will not remain unpunished, but she will never perish, the daughter of so many merits, so many sighs, and so many tears.
"A day will come, and we hope it will not be far, when France, like Saul on the road to Damascus, will be surrounded by a heavenly light and will hear a voice repeating to her, "My daughter, why do you persecute me?" And to her response, "Who art thou, Lord?" the voice will reply, "I am Jesus, whom you persecute. It is hard for you to kick against the goad, because, in your obstinacy, you destroy yourself." And she, trembling and astonished, will say, "Lord, what wouldst thou have me do?" And He will say, "Rise up, wash the filth that has disfigured you, awaken in your heart those dormant affections and the pact of our alliance and go, eldest daughter of the Church, predestined nation, vessel of election, go, as in the past, and carry my name before all peoples and before the kings of the earth."


II. The First Pastoral Letter of Card. Pie and the First Encyclical of Pope Pius X

Cardinal Pie: The first Pastoral Letter
(Nov. 25, 1849)10

"It is not for us to say with what pleading and with what tears we have asked that this chalice pass far from us...; but in submitting to a will stronger than our own, we have accepted a heavy charge, a labor of courage and sacrifice. For we are not so blind to the nature of things as to be dazzled by certain outer appearances. We cannot mistake the fact that human society is prey to an evil more intimate, more profound, and more destructive than can be expressed in words.

"The logic of passions, long held in check, retained in its advance, has finally produced the inevitable conclusions of the principles posed by the previous centuries. We live in the fatal period of consequences–of extreme consequences. Each day the last hopes melt away; the same terrible problems, pushed aside for a moment, present themselves before us. Any human solution is henceforth impossible. There remains only one alternative: submit ourselves to God, or perish.

"If you ask me at this moment who we are, to what party we belong, I will answer without hesitation. We are, and we will be among you the man of God. We will always be of the party of God. We will engage all of our efforts, and consecrate our entire life, to the service of the divine cause. And if we were to adopt one rule of action, it would be this: "Instaurare omnia in Christo–To restore all things in Christ" (Eph. 1:10).

"...What essentially characterizes the modern age is that the world has now been separated into two parties, along a clearer dividing-line and according to a more frank opposition than at any other age, that is, the party of God, and the party of man–or if you prefer, of the prideful genius that drives him. The struggle between man and God had never been more open or more direct. No other generation had broken its every pact with heaven, or so absolutely. No society had ever spoken to God with such resolution or audacity, telling Him: "Begone!" Man had never set himself up as a god on earth with greater insolence. He thought he had already vanquished. The old dream of human pride was thus to become a reality: man was to be his own god.

"One could easily have believed that the son of perdition, announced by St. Paul, had appeared on the earth, or at least that all the elements he was to embody awaited only their unification in a single person to constitute the Antichrist named by the Scriptures. Vowed to the most constant opposition, adversary of all belief and of any affirmation of truth, man had also toppled all that bore the character of the divinity, or any resemblance thereof. And if the idea of a god still remained, it was because man, putting himself at the place of his Creator, had made the universe into a temple, in which he played the god.

"The struggle was unequal, and we knew which side would carry off the victory and which know defeat. The more man seemed to triumph, the more surely we predicted his fall, and, to speak as do the holy books, one of those catastrophes whose blast long echoes in the ears of those who hear.

"History had taught us that God hides Himself for a certain time, and that He seems at times to retreat before His enemies, but that these apparent defeats are of the moment, and are only the wise and cunning tactics of Providence, after which He takes back the position and delivers the final blow. More than once it seemed to us that the heavenly spirits, weary of the long success of the triumphant rebellion, adopted the language of the prophets and said, "Arise, O God, and may it not be given to man to prevail."

"That is why, notwithstanding the great work of social reconstruction undertaken by so many architects at once, we will suffer in spite of ourselves the consequences of the sins of our fathers, so long as we have not rebuilt, in the heart of the nation, the temple they overturned. Men speak of a great party founded in the name of order and compromise. Only one party can save the world, the party of God. There alone is salvation. Renounce our dreams of independence from the Supreme Being, and submit to Him. Make no mistake. The burning question, and the question that troubles the world, is not between man and man; it is between man and God. If we were to adopt a single rule of action, it would be "to re-establish all things in Jesus Christ." Jesus Christ! Ah! We are profoundly moved as we utter this sacred name among you for the first time, this saving name that we will have so often to repeat. "For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid by the hand of God; which is Christ Jesus" (I Cor. 3:11).

"The God whose minister–whose ambassador–we shall be among you is not that vague, complacent God whose tutelary authority is invoked by today's materialism, taking fright and wishing to defend its pleasures and its idols against the new wave of invaders, firmly resolved to pay Him no tribute in return, and certainly not to offer Him any sacrifice. Our God is He who gave His law to men, who came down to earth and who spoke in the person of Jesus Christ, His Son and His envoy. Outside of Jesus Christ, there is no other Messias, or Revelation, or Savior. Both God and Jesus Christ are to be found by us only in the Catholic Church. Whoever does not listen to the Church, is in our eyes worse than an infidel.

"Therefore, to replace all these things under the legitimate empire of God, of Jesus Christ, and of the Church; everywhere combat that sacrilege which puts man in the place of God, and which is the chief crime of the modern age; resolve anew, by the precepts or the counsels of the Gospel and by the institutions of the Church, all the problems that the Gospel and the Church had already resolved–education, family, property, power; to re-establish a Catholic balance between the diverse conditions within society; to pacify the earth and give citizens to heaven: such is our mission.


Pope St. Pius X: The first encyclical E Supremi Apostolatus
(Oct. 4, 1903)11

"I need not remind you with what tears and ardent prayers we endeavored to turn aside the heavy charge of the supreme pontificate. Fully conscious of our weakness, we dreaded to take on a work so replete with difficulty, and yet so imperative.

"We felt a kind of terror when we called to mind the tragic condition of humanity today. Can anyone be unaware of the profound and serious illness from which human society suffers–now so much more than in the past–and which, worsening day by day and eating away at its very substance, drags it down to ruin? This illness, as you well know, is apostasy and the rejection of God; and surely there is nothing that leads more inevitably to disaster, according to the word of the prophet, "Behold, those who depart far from you will perish."

"We declare in all truth that we desire to be, in the midst of human societies, nothing other than the minister of that God who has invested us with His authority–and with the divine assistance, we shall be only that. His interests remain our interests; to consecrate our strength and our life to them: such is our unshakable resolution. That is why, if one asks us for a motto revealing the very depths of our soul, we will give none but this: "To restore all things in Christ."

"...in the face of the impious war that has been declared and that continues to be waged against God from nearly every side. In our day it is only too true, "the nations have trembled and the peoples have meditated folly" against their Creator, and this cry has become nearly a commonplace among His enemies: "Depart from us." From there springs, from nearly every side, a total rejection of any respect for God. From there spring those manners of living, public as well as private, without the least regard for His sovereignty. What is more, there is no effort and no artifice that is not employed in the attempt to abolish the memory of Him, and even the very notion of God.

"He who considers these things may well fear that such a perversion of mind be the beginning of those evils announced for the end of time and as it were their introduction upon the earth, and that truly the son of perdition of whom the Apostle speaks (II Thess. 2:2) is already among us. So great is the boldness and so violent the rage with which men everywhere hurl themselves to the assault of religion, attack the dogmas of the Faith, and labor with obstinacy to destroy all relation of man to the divinity! On the other hand–and this is the hallmark of the Antichrist, in the very words of the same Apostle–man, with an unspeakable temerity, has usurped the throne of the Creator, raising himself above all that bears the name of God. And this to such a degree that, powerless to eradicate in himself the notion of God, he nonetheless shakes off the yoke of His majesty and dedicates the temple of the visible world to himself, where he wishes to receive the adoration of his fellow creatures. "He is enthroned in the temple of God, where he presides as if he himself were God."

"No sane mind can doubt what will be the outcome of this war waged on God by frail mortals. Man is surely able to abuse his liberty if he wishes and violate the rights and the supreme authority of the Creator, but the victory will always belong to the Creator. But my words fall short. Catastrophe threatens all the closer precisely when man waxes more audacious in the hope of triumph.

"But this confidence does not dispense us from hastening the divine work, insofar as it depends on us, and not only by untiring prayer: "Arise, O Lord, and do not allow man to prevail in his force," but also by demanding the fullness of God's empire over man and all creation.

"We know that many, driven by the love of peace–that is, the tranquility of order–come together in associations, forming what they call "the party of order." Alas! Vain hopes and wasted labors! There is only one force of order capable of re-establishing tranquility in the midst of universal turmoil–the party of God. It is therefore that party that we must promote, and to this association that we must attract the greatest possible number of adherents, if we have public security at heart.

"Nonetheless, and whatever be our efforts to realize it, this return of nations to the respect of God's sovereign majesty can only come about through Jesus Christ. Indeed, the Apostle warns us that "other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus" (I Cor. 3:11).

"From this it follows that restoring all things in Christ and bringing men back to God's obedience are one and the same thing. And that is why the goal toward which all our efforts should tend is to bring the human race back under the empire of Christ. This accomplished, man will find himself led back to God, by that very fact.

"We do not refer to a lifeless God, unconcerned with the ways of man, like the one invented by materialists in their foolish imaginings, but a living and true God, three Persons in the unity of a single nature, Author of the universe, extending His infinite Providence to all things, and finally a very just Law-Maker who punishes the guilty and ensures the recompense of virtue.

"Now what is the way that gives us access to Jesus Christ? She is before our eyes–the Church. As St. John Chrysostom rightly tells us, "The Church is your hope; the Church is your salvation; the Church is your refuge."

"That is why Christ established her after having acquired her by the price of His blood. That is why He confided His doctrine and the precepts of His law to her, at the same time bestowing on her the treasures of divine grace for the sanctification and the salvation of mankind.

"It is a question of leading human societies, strayed far from the wisdom of Christ, back to the obedience of the Church; the Church, in turn, will submit them to Christ, and Christ to God.

"First and foremost, if the results are to match our desires, we must employ every means and consecrate every effort to uprooting entirely that monstrous and detestable iniquity proper to the present age and by which man puts himself in the place of God; to re-establish in their former dignity the very holy laws and counsels of the Gospel; to proclaim far and wide the truths handed down by the Church concerning the sanctity of marriage, the education of youth, the possession and the use of temporal goods, the duties of those who govern; finally, to re-establish the just balance among the diverse classes of society according to Christian laws and institutions.




III. The prayer of Pope Pius X for the Novena to the Immaculate Conception

Cardinal Pie

O spotless Virgin, you were pleasing to the Lord, and you were His Mother only because you were immaculate in all things; immaculate in your flesh as in your soul; immaculate in your faith as in your charity.

Indeed, the great blasphemer, the great cause of damnation, is the serpent, against whom was pronounced the first of damnations.

And you, O Mary conceived without sin, thou art the woman of the promise who has crushed the head of the serpent. I say it, "of the serpent"–and it was foretold–who never ceases to lay traps for thy heel, and who yet continues in his enmity against thy race. But while that head which raises itself beneath thy victorious foot, hisses damnation and blasphemy through every age, thou, O Virgin, O Mother, O Queen, thou lettest rise toward the heavenly throne the accent of thy all-powerful supplication. O Mary Immaculate, we join our prayer to thine this day. And the Church, and Rome, and Christian France will once again sing the hymn of deliverance, of victory, and of peace.


Pope Pius X

Most holy Virgin, who wast pleasing to the Lord and who became His Mother, Immaculate Virgin in thy body, in thy soul, in thy faith, and in thy love, have pity on us, and look with kindness on us, so miserable, who implore thy powerful protection.

Alas! The infernal serpent, against whom was cast the first damnation, continues to combat and to tempt the poor sons of Eve.

O thou, our blessed Mother, our queen and our advocate, thou who crushest the head of the enemy from the first moment of thy conception, accept our prayers, and, united as in one heart, we beseech thee. Present them before the throne of God in order that we never allow ourselves to be taken by the traps laid before us, but that we all reach the port of salvation; and that in the midst of so many dangers, the Church and Catholic society sing once again the hymn of deliverance, of victory, and of peace.

For a side-by-side comparison, click here.



IV. A Final Example


Cardinal Pie
Homily preached on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of his episcopal consecration (Nov.25,1864)13

"Hear this maxim, O you, Catholics full of temerity, who so quickly adopt the ideas and the language of your time, you who speak of reconciling the faith and of reconciling the Church with the modern spirit and with the new law. And you who accept with so much confidence the most dangerous pursuits of what our age so pridefully labels "Science," see to what extent you are straying from the program set out by the great Apostle, "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so-called" (I Tim. 6:20). But take heed. With such temerities, one is soon led farther than he first had thought. And in placing themselves on the slope of profane novelties–in obeying the currents of so-called science–many have lost the Faith.

"Have you not often been saddened, and taken fright, my venerable brothers, on hearing the language of certain men, who believe themselves still to be sons of the Church, men who still practice occasionally as Catholics and who often approach the Lord's Table? Do you still believe them to be sons, do you still believe them to be members of the Church, those who, wrapping themselves in such vague phrases as modern aspirations and the force of progress and civilization, proclaim the existence of a "consciousness of the laity," of a secular and political conscience opposed to the "conscience of the Church," against which they assume the right to react, for its correction and renewal? Ah! So many passengers, and even pilots, who, believing themselves to be yet in the barque, and playing with profane novelties and the lying science of their time, have already sunk and are in the abyss."


Pope St. Pius X

The letter Il Gravore Dolore on the occasion of the creation of new cardinals (May 27, 1914)14

"Alas! We are living in an age when men welcome and adopt with great ease certain ideas of reconciling the Faith with the modern spirit; ideas that lead much farther than one would imagine, not only to the weakening, but to the complete loss of the Faith. One is no longer surprised to hear men who delight in the most vague expressions of modern aspiration, of the force of progress and of civilization; who delight in affirming the existence of a conscience of the laity, a political conscience opposed to the conscience of the Church, against which they assume the right to react for its correction and renewal.

"It is not unheard-of to meet individuals who express doubts and uncertainty about truths, and even obstinately cling to manifest errors, a hundred times condemned, and who are nonetheless convinced that they have never left the Church, since they sometimes accomplish Catholic duties. Oh! How many navigators, how many pilots, and–God forbid–how many captains, confident in profane novelties and in the lying science of the time, rather than arriving at the port, have already capsized."

For a side-by-side comparison, click here.


V. Conclusion

People can talk all they like of the Rights of Man: there are two of them that must never be forgotten. Every man is born with the right to death and the right to hell (Cardinal Pie).15

When he first was made a bishop, Giuseppe Sarto took on his charge with resolution animated by that hope which was symbolized in his coat of arms–an anchor cast into a stormy sea, lit up by a star. It was a passage from St. Paul (Heb. 6:18-19) that inspired his choice. Perhaps he added the lion when he became the successor of St. Mark's in Venice. As for the motto of his pontificate, "To restore all things in Christ," he had already taken it as patriarch, and there is every indication that it was the motto of his entire episcopate.

Cardinal Pie was a great figure. Now, more than ever in this battle waged between the Church and the Revolution, he remains the man who dominates the situation. He is a light, a standard-bearer, a leader worthy of a rank of honor among those fathers of our generation whom we should praise, whose counsels we should follow, whose example we should imitate, and upon whose teachings we should meditate. If our heart's ambition is to serve the sacred cause of God and His Holy Church in the troubled times in which we are living we can benefit from placing ourselves at the school of this master. (Praise of Cardinal Pie expressed by Cardinal Billot on the 100th anniversary of his birth [Sept. 26, 1915])16

Before closing this study, I cannot resist telling you the story of a conversation between Msgr. Pie and the emperor Napoleon III (Mar. 5, 1859),17 following the account of Canon Etienne Catta in The Social and Political Doctrine of Cardinal Pie.18

The audience lasted 55 minutes. The emperor himself had brought the conversation over to politics. He dismissed all negative interpretations of his Italian intervention.19 He only wished well to the pontifical government, and desired to "render it more popular, showing Europe that France had not maintained an army of occupation in Rome in order to give its stamp to corruption."

Msgr. Pie asked if he might express his thoughts frankly, Napoleon III granted the request, far from imagining the line of argument that was about to drive him into a corner.

"Since Your Majesty deigns to hear my opinion," said the bishop, "you will also permit my surprise at the scruples that make you fear all appearance of giving your stamp to corruption by the presence of our army of occupation in Rome. Surely, I am aware that there are abuses everywhere. What government can claim to escape them entirely? But I dare say that nowhere are there fewer abuses than in the city and in the states governed by the pope. May it please Your Majesty to consider Constantinople and Turkey, on the other hand. May you draw a comparison and permit me to ask what our glorious Crimean expedition was doing there?20 Is it not there rather than to Rome that France went to give her stamp to corruption?"

The secretary of Msgr. Pie, who was taking down the account of the audience by dictation, recounts that at that moment, "the eyes of the Emperor, ordinarily half-closed, were raised for a moment on his audacious interviewer."

"Ah! Sire, when one considers that, during 11 centuries, the policy of Catholic Europe was to combat the Turks, how can one avoid a certain astonishment seeing the sovereign of a Catholic country providing support for the Ottoman power, and embarking, at great cost, to ensure its independence? Indeed, am I not justified in asserting that such an action was precisely putting the stamp on corruption? I ask you, whom are we protecting? There is a man, at Constantinople–or rather a being that I prefer not to qualify–who eats, out of a trough of gold, 200 million francs [about 37 million U.S. dollars–Ed.] earned by the sweat of Catholics. He eats them with his 800 legitimate wives, his 36 sultans and his 750 harem-girls, not counting the court favorites, the sons-in-law and their wives. And it was to perpetuate and consolidate such a state of affairs that we embarked for the East! It was to ensure its security that we threw away two billion francs [about 370 million U.S. dollars–Ed.], 68 superior officers, 350 young men, the flower of our noble families, and 200,000 Frenchmen. In view of all that, are we really here discussing the corruption of pontifical Rome?"

During this discourse, the emperor twisted his long moustache, and the bishop observed that he pulled them lower as the question became more embarrassing. Msgr. Pie continued:

"Excuse me, Sire, but not only did we say to this Turk, 'Continue to wallow in your age-old mire as you have done in the past. I guarantee your pleasures and I will not permit anyone to lay a hand on your empire,' but we added, 'Great Sultan, until now, the pope, the sovereign of Rome, had presided at the councils of Europe. Well, now we are going to have a European Council. The pope will not be there, but you will come, you who have never been part of it before. Not only will you be there, but we will perform before you the trial of the absent old man. And we will give you the pleasure of seeing us describe and submit to your judgment all the so-called corruption of his government!'"

"Truly, Sire, is that not what has taken place?"

Seeing the bishop's animation, the emperor had drawn closer. He listened spellbound, passing his hand over his forehead. Suddenly, he changed the direction of the conversation:

"But honestly, Monsignor, have I not given abundant proof of my goodwill toward religion? The Restoration of the monarchy itself did not do more than I have done."

With this remark the way was open, and the bishop, inspired, could express his own idea of what Christian politics should be, going straight to the principles that guide it.

"I am most eager to do justice to Your Majesty's religious dispositions, and I can quite appreciate, Sire, the services you have rendered to Rome and the Church, particularly in the first years of your government.

"Perhaps the Restoration did not do more than you. But allow me to add that neither the Restoration, nor you, have done for God what should have been done. Neither of you has raised up His throne. Neither of you has denied the principles of the Revolution, whose practical consequences you continue to fight because the social gospel that inspires the State is still the Declaration of the Rights of Man, which, Sire, is nothing other than the formal negation of the rights of God.

"Indeed, it is among the rights of God to rule over States as over individuals. It was for this alone that our Lord came upon the earth. He ought to reign here by inspiring our laws, sanctifying our morals, enlightening our teaching, directing our counsel, and ordering the actions of governments as of the governed. Everywhere that Jesus Christ does not reign, there is disorder and decadence.

"It is my duty to tell you that He does not reign among us and that our Constitution is not that of a Christian and a Catholic State–far from it. Our public law establishes that the Catholic religion is that of the majority of the French people, but it adds that all other religions have a right to an equal protection. Is that not tantamount to proclaiming that the Constitution equally protects truth and error? Well, Sire, do you know what Jesus Christ responds to governments who incur the guilt of such a contradiction? Jesus Christ, King of heaven and earth, answers them. 'I, too, O governments, who succeed yourselves the one upon the other, as you overthrow one another, I, too, grant you equal protection. I granted this protection to the Bourbon king, and the same to the Republic, and to you as well I accord the same protection.'"

The emperor stopped the bishop.

"But do you still imagine that in our day such a thing could exist, and that the moment has arrived to establish the exclusively religious reign that you demand? Do you not rather think, Monsignor, that such an action would unleash the most passionate opposition?"

The bishop of Poitiers had not spoken of an "exclusively religious reign," he had simply brought to light the divine prerogative to dominate every reign. The essential of the objection consisted in the "political expedience" that is always put first. He answered it with this solemn reply:

"Sire, when great men of politics like Your Majesty object that the moment has not come, I can only bow before their judgment, because I am not a great man of politics. But I am a bishop, and as a bishop, I answer them. 'The moment has not come for Jesus Christ to reign. In that case, the moment has not come for governments to endure.'"21

If only God would accord us, not a half-dozen, but a single shepherd of this mettle, and the quality of the air we breathe would be greatly improved.


Footnotes
1. June 2, 1835-August 20, 1914, pope from 1903-14. Defunctus adhuc loquitur refers to the sacrifice of Abel which still rises to heaven after his murder: "and by it he being dead yet speaketh" (Heb. 11:4).
2. La doctrine politique et sociale du cardinal Pie (Paris: Nouvelles Editions Latines, 1959) p. 362.
3. Actes de S.S. Pie X (Bonne Press), VII, 188.
4. Pages choisies du cardinal Pie (Paris-Poitiers: Oudin, 1916) 2 vol., Introduction, p. xi.
5. See also René Bazin, St. Pie X, 1928 edition, pp. 57-58.
6. You can read it in the Bulletin diocesain de Bayonne, December 1, 1918, pp. 597-598; No. 28 of Itineraires published it, p. 42; in the same review, Fr. Calmel cites it as well, in his article "Brumes du revelationisme" (No. 181, p. 182); Fr. Rifan referred to it in his sermon during the day of "BBR 1998"; Francis-Marie Algoud also cites it in Annex XVII, p. 480, of his book Histoire de la volonte de perversion de Vintelligence et des moeurs; and the 15th centenary of the baptism of Clovis, in 1996, provided a new occasion for a number of journals to reprint this prophecy, such as Sel de la Terre, No. 17, pp. 86-87.
7. Oeuvres de Monseigneur l'eveque de Poitiers (Paris-Poitiers: Oudin, 1886-1879) 1st edition, Vols. I to IX. The 10th edition was published by Leday, Paris, and contained l0 vols. (1890-1894).
8. Ibid., t. V, pp. 506-507.
9. Documents pontificaux de S.S. saint Pie X (Versailles: Courrier de Rome, 1993), Vol.11, pp. 396-397.
10. Oeuvres de Monseigneur l'eveque de Poitiers, I, 96-119.
11. Documents pontificaux de S.S. saint Pie X, Vol.1, pp.33 ff.
12. Oeuvres de Monseigneur I'eveque de Poitiers, VII, 68.
13. Ibid., V, 376-377.
14. Documents pontificaux de S.S. saint Pie X, Vol.11, pp.575-577.
15. Oeuvres de Monseigneur l'eveque de Poitiers, V, 154.
16. Published in Nos. 40 and 41 of the Bulletin catholique of the diocese of Montauban, October 2 and 9, 1915, pp. 339, 342.
17. Napoleon III was proclaimed emperor November 7, 1852, following the coup d'état of December 2, 1851, remaining emperor until his imprisonment by the Prussians at Sedan, August 30, 1870. The empire was overthrown a few days later and a republic was proclaimed, September 4, by Favre, Gambetta, and Ferry.
18. La Doctrine politique et sociale du cardinal Pie (Paris: Nouvelles Editions Latines, 1959), ch. XIII: "L'eveque, l'empereur and la question romaine," pp. 301-304.
19. Beginning in June 1849 (when Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, future Napoleon III, was president of the Republic), France had sent an expeditionary force into Italy–the Papal States–to support the pope who was being attacked by Italian "republican" forces. The French troops occupied Rome from July 3, 1849, to December 11, 1866. However, Napoleon III–himself a former carbonaro [Freemason]–wished to maintain his alliance with the House of Piedmont, [desirous of a secular, united Italy] and little by little weakened his policy of support for the papacy, letting the Piedmontese conquer Italy and invade the Pontifical States in 1860-61.
20.The Crimean expedition (1854-55) was composed of an alliance of French, English, Piedmontese, and Turkish troops, against the Russians.
21. These words were repeated before the French Chamber of Deputies, June 2, 1958, by a deputy, Mr. Guy Jarrosson. See the Journal Officiel, June 3, 1958.]]> PIUS X AND CARDINAL PIE

Angelus Online 2004


May 18, 2004, is the 124th anniversary of the death of a man profoundly devoted to the Virgin Mary. He summed up his love for the Blessed Virgin in his episcopal motto: "Tuus sum ego–I am thine," and he had depicted on his episcopal coat of arms Our Lady of Chartres. He was a great servant of the Church. I am speaking of the Bishop of Poitiers, Cardinal Louis-Edouard Pie (1815-80).

Even after his death, we can nonetheless affirm that he was to speak again by the mouth of a pope–Pope St. Pius X.1 As a matter of fact, we know that Monsignor Giuseppe Sarto became familiar with the French language by reading the works of Cardinal Pie. Is that really all he drew from them?

Pope Pius X never hid his admiration for Cardinal Pie, who was probably the greatest French bishop of the 19th century. The posthumous influence that he was to exercise on Pius X does even more credit to his teaching. On March 1, 1912, he gratified the cathedral of Poitiers with the title of minor basilica, a tribute which revealed what was in his heart, as Canon Etienne Catta remarks in his book The Social and Political Doctrine of Cardinal Pie.2 To Cardinal Pie, Pope Pius X rendered homage that day when he referred to St. Hilary, Doctor of the Church:

Quote:The intrepid champion of the divinity of Christ against the Arians, but alongside of him it is sweet to remember Louis-Edouard Pie, cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, who, like a second Hilary–alter Hilarius–avenged the integrity of the Faith against the modern Arians by his victorious eloquence.3

Canon Vigué recounts in the introduction to his Selected Writings of Cardinal Pie4 that one day a priest from the diocese of Poitiers had the honor of being received into the office of Pope Pius X:

Quote:"Oh! The diocese of Cardinal Pie," said the Holy Father, raising his arms as soon as he had heard the name of Poitiers. "I have the works of your cardinal right here, and for years hardly a day has gone by that I haven't read a few pages."

As he spoke, he took one of the volumes and put it in the hands of his visitors. These could tell, by the wear on the binding, that they must have belonged to the parish priest of Salzano or the spiritual director of the seminary of Treviso long before entering the Vatican.

"As soon as I can snatch a few moments," admitted Pius X on another occasion, "I read something by your great cardinal, Cardinal Pie. He is my mentor."5

Pope Pius X was imbued with the writings of the Bishop of Poitiers and many times, in his pontifical acts, the Pope was to cite him without giving his name. The four examples that follow will try to prove this fact: I) The famous "prophecy" concerning France's future; II) The first pages of his first encyclical, E Supremi Apostolatus; III) The prayer of Pope Pius X to the Immaculate Conception; IV) A final example; V) Conclusion.


"Prophecy for France"

This "prophecy" of Pope Pius X has been published often.6 It was pronounced November 29, 1911, during the allocution Vi Ringrazio, which was a response to Cardinal Falconio, after the creation of several new cardinals, among whom were numbered three Frenchmen distinguished in the battle against modernism: Cardinals Cabrieres, Dubillard, and Billot. The Pope's discourse was not an improvisation; it had been written out by the Pope beforehand. Cardinal Merry del Val testified to the fact before the bishop of Laval during an audience; the latter referred to it in his Religious Week [Semaine Religieuse], July 29, 1917. The letter itself, if not its spirit, had been drawn from the works of Cardinal Pie. Some support for this claim is found in Cardinal Pie's homily when he took possession of his titular see of Santa Maria della Vittoria, in Rome (Sept. 28, 1879)–the very homily printed in the last volume of his episcopal writings7 (Vol. X, pp. 63-64).

The thought of Cardinal Pie, which became a "prophecy" in the mouth of St. Pius X, was present in his mind when a parish priest, then bishop, and at last a cardinal, that is to say, during his entire life. This is proven by his sermon "On the Duty of Society as a Whole to Turn Itself Toward God" which he gave in the cathedral of Chartres (Mar. 1, 1846) and the funeral sermon for General de La Moriciere, delivered in the cathedral of Poitiers (Dec. 5, 1865) and published in the episcopal works Oeuvres de Monseigneur l'eveque de Poitiers. It is probably from here that Pius X drew his "prophetic inspiration."


T
[Image: pius-X.jpg]


Pope St. Pius X

[Image: cardinal-pie.jpg]

Cardinal Pie


What follows is the text of Cardinal Pie which was known to Pope Pius X, with his "prophecy" in the column facing it; then the main passages of Pius X's first encyclical, across from passages of Cardinal Pie's first pastoral letter which are most likely their origin. Finally, we reprint Pope Pius X's prayer to the Immaculate Virgin which reads very much like its probable source, Cardinal Pie's prayer to the Immaculate Virgin:


Comparison of the Texts


I. The "Prophecy" Concerning France

This "prophecy" of Pope Pius X had been formulated a second time by Cardinal Pie (Dec. 5, 1864). It is clearly from this text that the Pope drew his inspiration.


Cardinal Pie
Text of Card. Pie (Dec. 5, 1864)8
"God holds in his hands the hearts of peoples as well as the hearts of men. Courage, O France: thus you will return to your first vocation. Precious instincts, which yet escape you, but which are only asleep, will awaken in your breast.
"And even as, like Saul, still breathing threats and slaughter on the road to Damascus, you seem perhaps to be engaged in the way of impiety and violence, suddenly a secret force will throw you to the ground, a blinding light will shine about you, and a voice will be heard: "Who art thou?" you will cry: "Quis es, Domine?' "I am Jesus, whom you pursue, whom you persecute: Ego sum Jesus quem tu persequeris." O France, it is hard for you to kick against the goad. To make war on God is not in your nature. Rise up, predestined race, vessel of election, and go, as in the past, carry my name to all peoples and to all the kings of the earth."
Pope St. Pius X
The allocution Vi Ringrazio
(Nov. 29, 1911)9
"What shall I say to you now, dear sons of France, who groan beneath the weight of persecution? The people who made an alliance with God at the baptismal font of Rheims will repent and return to its first vocation. Her faults will not remain unpunished, but she will never perish, the daughter of so many merits, so many sighs, and so many tears.
"A day will come, and we hope it will not be far, when France, like Saul on the road to Damascus, will be surrounded by a heavenly light and will hear a voice repeating to her, "My daughter, why do you persecute me?" And to her response, "Who art thou, Lord?" the voice will reply, "I am Jesus, whom you persecute. It is hard for you to kick against the goad, because, in your obstinacy, you destroy yourself." And she, trembling and astonished, will say, "Lord, what wouldst thou have me do?" And He will say, "Rise up, wash the filth that has disfigured you, awaken in your heart those dormant affections and the pact of our alliance and go, eldest daughter of the Church, predestined nation, vessel of election, go, as in the past, and carry my name before all peoples and before the kings of the earth."


II. The First Pastoral Letter of Card. Pie and the First Encyclical of Pope Pius X

Cardinal Pie: The first Pastoral Letter
(Nov. 25, 1849)10

"It is not for us to say with what pleading and with what tears we have asked that this chalice pass far from us...; but in submitting to a will stronger than our own, we have accepted a heavy charge, a labor of courage and sacrifice. For we are not so blind to the nature of things as to be dazzled by certain outer appearances. We cannot mistake the fact that human society is prey to an evil more intimate, more profound, and more destructive than can be expressed in words.

"The logic of passions, long held in check, retained in its advance, has finally produced the inevitable conclusions of the principles posed by the previous centuries. We live in the fatal period of consequences–of extreme consequences. Each day the last hopes melt away; the same terrible problems, pushed aside for a moment, present themselves before us. Any human solution is henceforth impossible. There remains only one alternative: submit ourselves to God, or perish.

"If you ask me at this moment who we are, to what party we belong, I will answer without hesitation. We are, and we will be among you the man of God. We will always be of the party of God. We will engage all of our efforts, and consecrate our entire life, to the service of the divine cause. And if we were to adopt one rule of action, it would be this: "Instaurare omnia in Christo–To restore all things in Christ" (Eph. 1:10).

"...What essentially characterizes the modern age is that the world has now been separated into two parties, along a clearer dividing-line and according to a more frank opposition than at any other age, that is, the party of God, and the party of man–or if you prefer, of the prideful genius that drives him. The struggle between man and God had never been more open or more direct. No other generation had broken its every pact with heaven, or so absolutely. No society had ever spoken to God with such resolution or audacity, telling Him: "Begone!" Man had never set himself up as a god on earth with greater insolence. He thought he had already vanquished. The old dream of human pride was thus to become a reality: man was to be his own god.

"One could easily have believed that the son of perdition, announced by St. Paul, had appeared on the earth, or at least that all the elements he was to embody awaited only their unification in a single person to constitute the Antichrist named by the Scriptures. Vowed to the most constant opposition, adversary of all belief and of any affirmation of truth, man had also toppled all that bore the character of the divinity, or any resemblance thereof. And if the idea of a god still remained, it was because man, putting himself at the place of his Creator, had made the universe into a temple, in which he played the god.

"The struggle was unequal, and we knew which side would carry off the victory and which know defeat. The more man seemed to triumph, the more surely we predicted his fall, and, to speak as do the holy books, one of those catastrophes whose blast long echoes in the ears of those who hear.

"History had taught us that God hides Himself for a certain time, and that He seems at times to retreat before His enemies, but that these apparent defeats are of the moment, and are only the wise and cunning tactics of Providence, after which He takes back the position and delivers the final blow. More than once it seemed to us that the heavenly spirits, weary of the long success of the triumphant rebellion, adopted the language of the prophets and said, "Arise, O God, and may it not be given to man to prevail."

"That is why, notwithstanding the great work of social reconstruction undertaken by so many architects at once, we will suffer in spite of ourselves the consequences of the sins of our fathers, so long as we have not rebuilt, in the heart of the nation, the temple they overturned. Men speak of a great party founded in the name of order and compromise. Only one party can save the world, the party of God. There alone is salvation. Renounce our dreams of independence from the Supreme Being, and submit to Him. Make no mistake. The burning question, and the question that troubles the world, is not between man and man; it is between man and God. If we were to adopt a single rule of action, it would be "to re-establish all things in Jesus Christ." Jesus Christ! Ah! We are profoundly moved as we utter this sacred name among you for the first time, this saving name that we will have so often to repeat. "For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid by the hand of God; which is Christ Jesus" (I Cor. 3:11).

"The God whose minister–whose ambassador–we shall be among you is not that vague, complacent God whose tutelary authority is invoked by today's materialism, taking fright and wishing to defend its pleasures and its idols against the new wave of invaders, firmly resolved to pay Him no tribute in return, and certainly not to offer Him any sacrifice. Our God is He who gave His law to men, who came down to earth and who spoke in the person of Jesus Christ, His Son and His envoy. Outside of Jesus Christ, there is no other Messias, or Revelation, or Savior. Both God and Jesus Christ are to be found by us only in the Catholic Church. Whoever does not listen to the Church, is in our eyes worse than an infidel.

"Therefore, to replace all these things under the legitimate empire of God, of Jesus Christ, and of the Church; everywhere combat that sacrilege which puts man in the place of God, and which is the chief crime of the modern age; resolve anew, by the precepts or the counsels of the Gospel and by the institutions of the Church, all the problems that the Gospel and the Church had already resolved–education, family, property, power; to re-establish a Catholic balance between the diverse conditions within society; to pacify the earth and give citizens to heaven: such is our mission.


Pope St. Pius X: The first encyclical E Supremi Apostolatus
(Oct. 4, 1903)11

"I need not remind you with what tears and ardent prayers we endeavored to turn aside the heavy charge of the supreme pontificate. Fully conscious of our weakness, we dreaded to take on a work so replete with difficulty, and yet so imperative.

"We felt a kind of terror when we called to mind the tragic condition of humanity today. Can anyone be unaware of the profound and serious illness from which human society suffers–now so much more than in the past–and which, worsening day by day and eating away at its very substance, drags it down to ruin? This illness, as you well know, is apostasy and the rejection of God; and surely there is nothing that leads more inevitably to disaster, according to the word of the prophet, "Behold, those who depart far from you will perish."

"We declare in all truth that we desire to be, in the midst of human societies, nothing other than the minister of that God who has invested us with His authority–and with the divine assistance, we shall be only that. His interests remain our interests; to consecrate our strength and our life to them: such is our unshakable resolution. That is why, if one asks us for a motto revealing the very depths of our soul, we will give none but this: "To restore all things in Christ."

"...in the face of the impious war that has been declared and that continues to be waged against God from nearly every side. In our day it is only too true, "the nations have trembled and the peoples have meditated folly" against their Creator, and this cry has become nearly a commonplace among His enemies: "Depart from us." From there springs, from nearly every side, a total rejection of any respect for God. From there spring those manners of living, public as well as private, without the least regard for His sovereignty. What is more, there is no effort and no artifice that is not employed in the attempt to abolish the memory of Him, and even the very notion of God.

"He who considers these things may well fear that such a perversion of mind be the beginning of those evils announced for the end of time and as it were their introduction upon the earth, and that truly the son of perdition of whom the Apostle speaks (II Thess. 2:2) is already among us. So great is the boldness and so violent the rage with which men everywhere hurl themselves to the assault of religion, attack the dogmas of the Faith, and labor with obstinacy to destroy all relation of man to the divinity! On the other hand–and this is the hallmark of the Antichrist, in the very words of the same Apostle–man, with an unspeakable temerity, has usurped the throne of the Creator, raising himself above all that bears the name of God. And this to such a degree that, powerless to eradicate in himself the notion of God, he nonetheless shakes off the yoke of His majesty and dedicates the temple of the visible world to himself, where he wishes to receive the adoration of his fellow creatures. "He is enthroned in the temple of God, where he presides as if he himself were God."

"No sane mind can doubt what will be the outcome of this war waged on God by frail mortals. Man is surely able to abuse his liberty if he wishes and violate the rights and the supreme authority of the Creator, but the victory will always belong to the Creator. But my words fall short. Catastrophe threatens all the closer precisely when man waxes more audacious in the hope of triumph.

"But this confidence does not dispense us from hastening the divine work, insofar as it depends on us, and not only by untiring prayer: "Arise, O Lord, and do not allow man to prevail in his force," but also by demanding the fullness of God's empire over man and all creation.

"We know that many, driven by the love of peace–that is, the tranquility of order–come together in associations, forming what they call "the party of order." Alas! Vain hopes and wasted labors! There is only one force of order capable of re-establishing tranquility in the midst of universal turmoil–the party of God. It is therefore that party that we must promote, and to this association that we must attract the greatest possible number of adherents, if we have public security at heart.

"Nonetheless, and whatever be our efforts to realize it, this return of nations to the respect of God's sovereign majesty can only come about through Jesus Christ. Indeed, the Apostle warns us that "other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus" (I Cor. 3:11).

"From this it follows that restoring all things in Christ and bringing men back to God's obedience are one and the same thing. And that is why the goal toward which all our efforts should tend is to bring the human race back under the empire of Christ. This accomplished, man will find himself led back to God, by that very fact.

"We do not refer to a lifeless God, unconcerned with the ways of man, like the one invented by materialists in their foolish imaginings, but a living and true God, three Persons in the unity of a single nature, Author of the universe, extending His infinite Providence to all things, and finally a very just Law-Maker who punishes the guilty and ensures the recompense of virtue.

"Now what is the way that gives us access to Jesus Christ? She is before our eyes–the Church. As St. John Chrysostom rightly tells us, "The Church is your hope; the Church is your salvation; the Church is your refuge."

"That is why Christ established her after having acquired her by the price of His blood. That is why He confided His doctrine and the precepts of His law to her, at the same time bestowing on her the treasures of divine grace for the sanctification and the salvation of mankind.

"It is a question of leading human societies, strayed far from the wisdom of Christ, back to the obedience of the Church; the Church, in turn, will submit them to Christ, and Christ to God.

"First and foremost, if the results are to match our desires, we must employ every means and consecrate every effort to uprooting entirely that monstrous and detestable iniquity proper to the present age and by which man puts himself in the place of God; to re-establish in their former dignity the very holy laws and counsels of the Gospel; to proclaim far and wide the truths handed down by the Church concerning the sanctity of marriage, the education of youth, the possession and the use of temporal goods, the duties of those who govern; finally, to re-establish the just balance among the diverse classes of society according to Christian laws and institutions.




III. The prayer of Pope Pius X for the Novena to the Immaculate Conception

Cardinal Pie

O spotless Virgin, you were pleasing to the Lord, and you were His Mother only because you were immaculate in all things; immaculate in your flesh as in your soul; immaculate in your faith as in your charity.

Indeed, the great blasphemer, the great cause of damnation, is the serpent, against whom was pronounced the first of damnations.

And you, O Mary conceived without sin, thou art the woman of the promise who has crushed the head of the serpent. I say it, "of the serpent"–and it was foretold–who never ceases to lay traps for thy heel, and who yet continues in his enmity against thy race. But while that head which raises itself beneath thy victorious foot, hisses damnation and blasphemy through every age, thou, O Virgin, O Mother, O Queen, thou lettest rise toward the heavenly throne the accent of thy all-powerful supplication. O Mary Immaculate, we join our prayer to thine this day. And the Church, and Rome, and Christian France will once again sing the hymn of deliverance, of victory, and of peace.


Pope Pius X

Most holy Virgin, who wast pleasing to the Lord and who became His Mother, Immaculate Virgin in thy body, in thy soul, in thy faith, and in thy love, have pity on us, and look with kindness on us, so miserable, who implore thy powerful protection.

Alas! The infernal serpent, against whom was cast the first damnation, continues to combat and to tempt the poor sons of Eve.

O thou, our blessed Mother, our queen and our advocate, thou who crushest the head of the enemy from the first moment of thy conception, accept our prayers, and, united as in one heart, we beseech thee. Present them before the throne of God in order that we never allow ourselves to be taken by the traps laid before us, but that we all reach the port of salvation; and that in the midst of so many dangers, the Church and Catholic society sing once again the hymn of deliverance, of victory, and of peace.

For a side-by-side comparison, click here.



IV. A Final Example


Cardinal Pie
Homily preached on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of his episcopal consecration (Nov.25,1864)13

"Hear this maxim, O you, Catholics full of temerity, who so quickly adopt the ideas and the language of your time, you who speak of reconciling the faith and of reconciling the Church with the modern spirit and with the new law. And you who accept with so much confidence the most dangerous pursuits of what our age so pridefully labels "Science," see to what extent you are straying from the program set out by the great Apostle, "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so-called" (I Tim. 6:20). But take heed. With such temerities, one is soon led farther than he first had thought. And in placing themselves on the slope of profane novelties–in obeying the currents of so-called science–many have lost the Faith.

"Have you not often been saddened, and taken fright, my venerable brothers, on hearing the language of certain men, who believe themselves still to be sons of the Church, men who still practice occasionally as Catholics and who often approach the Lord's Table? Do you still believe them to be sons, do you still believe them to be members of the Church, those who, wrapping themselves in such vague phrases as modern aspirations and the force of progress and civilization, proclaim the existence of a "consciousness of the laity," of a secular and political conscience opposed to the "conscience of the Church," against which they assume the right to react, for its correction and renewal? Ah! So many passengers, and even pilots, who, believing themselves to be yet in the barque, and playing with profane novelties and the lying science of their time, have already sunk and are in the abyss."


Pope St. Pius X

The letter Il Gravore Dolore on the occasion of the creation of new cardinals (May 27, 1914)14

"Alas! We are living in an age when men welcome and adopt with great ease certain ideas of reconciling the Faith with the modern spirit; ideas that lead much farther than one would imagine, not only to the weakening, but to the complete loss of the Faith. One is no longer surprised to hear men who delight in the most vague expressions of modern aspiration, of the force of progress and of civilization; who delight in affirming the existence of a conscience of the laity, a political conscience opposed to the conscience of the Church, against which they assume the right to react for its correction and renewal.

"It is not unheard-of to meet individuals who express doubts and uncertainty about truths, and even obstinately cling to manifest errors, a hundred times condemned, and who are nonetheless convinced that they have never left the Church, since they sometimes accomplish Catholic duties. Oh! How many navigators, how many pilots, and–God forbid–how many captains, confident in profane novelties and in the lying science of the time, rather than arriving at the port, have already capsized."

For a side-by-side comparison, click here.


V. Conclusion

People can talk all they like of the Rights of Man: there are two of them that must never be forgotten. Every man is born with the right to death and the right to hell (Cardinal Pie).15

When he first was made a bishop, Giuseppe Sarto took on his charge with resolution animated by that hope which was symbolized in his coat of arms–an anchor cast into a stormy sea, lit up by a star. It was a passage from St. Paul (Heb. 6:18-19) that inspired his choice. Perhaps he added the lion when he became the successor of St. Mark's in Venice. As for the motto of his pontificate, "To restore all things in Christ," he had already taken it as patriarch, and there is every indication that it was the motto of his entire episcopate.

Cardinal Pie was a great figure. Now, more than ever in this battle waged between the Church and the Revolution, he remains the man who dominates the situation. He is a light, a standard-bearer, a leader worthy of a rank of honor among those fathers of our generation whom we should praise, whose counsels we should follow, whose example we should imitate, and upon whose teachings we should meditate. If our heart's ambition is to serve the sacred cause of God and His Holy Church in the troubled times in which we are living we can benefit from placing ourselves at the school of this master. (Praise of Cardinal Pie expressed by Cardinal Billot on the 100th anniversary of his birth [Sept. 26, 1915])16

Before closing this study, I cannot resist telling you the story of a conversation between Msgr. Pie and the emperor Napoleon III (Mar. 5, 1859),17 following the account of Canon Etienne Catta in The Social and Political Doctrine of Cardinal Pie.18

The audience lasted 55 minutes. The emperor himself had brought the conversation over to politics. He dismissed all negative interpretations of his Italian intervention.19 He only wished well to the pontifical government, and desired to "render it more popular, showing Europe that France had not maintained an army of occupation in Rome in order to give its stamp to corruption."

Msgr. Pie asked if he might express his thoughts frankly, Napoleon III granted the request, far from imagining the line of argument that was about to drive him into a corner.

"Since Your Majesty deigns to hear my opinion," said the bishop, "you will also permit my surprise at the scruples that make you fear all appearance of giving your stamp to corruption by the presence of our army of occupation in Rome. Surely, I am aware that there are abuses everywhere. What government can claim to escape them entirely? But I dare say that nowhere are there fewer abuses than in the city and in the states governed by the pope. May it please Your Majesty to consider Constantinople and Turkey, on the other hand. May you draw a comparison and permit me to ask what our glorious Crimean expedition was doing there?20 Is it not there rather than to Rome that France went to give her stamp to corruption?"

The secretary of Msgr. Pie, who was taking down the account of the audience by dictation, recounts that at that moment, "the eyes of the Emperor, ordinarily half-closed, were raised for a moment on his audacious interviewer."

"Ah! Sire, when one considers that, during 11 centuries, the policy of Catholic Europe was to combat the Turks, how can one avoid a certain astonishment seeing the sovereign of a Catholic country providing support for the Ottoman power, and embarking, at great cost, to ensure its independence? Indeed, am I not justified in asserting that such an action was precisely putting the stamp on corruption? I ask you, whom are we protecting? There is a man, at Constantinople–or rather a being that I prefer not to qualify–who eats, out of a trough of gold, 200 million francs [about 37 million U.S. dollars–Ed.] earned by the sweat of Catholics. He eats them with his 800 legitimate wives, his 36 sultans and his 750 harem-girls, not counting the court favorites, the sons-in-law and their wives. And it was to perpetuate and consolidate such a state of affairs that we embarked for the East! It was to ensure its security that we threw away two billion francs [about 370 million U.S. dollars–Ed.], 68 superior officers, 350 young men, the flower of our noble families, and 200,000 Frenchmen. In view of all that, are we really here discussing the corruption of pontifical Rome?"

During this discourse, the emperor twisted his long moustache, and the bishop observed that he pulled them lower as the question became more embarrassing. Msgr. Pie continued:

"Excuse me, Sire, but not only did we say to this Turk, 'Continue to wallow in your age-old mire as you have done in the past. I guarantee your pleasures and I will not permit anyone to lay a hand on your empire,' but we added, 'Great Sultan, until now, the pope, the sovereign of Rome, had presided at the councils of Europe. Well, now we are going to have a European Council. The pope will not be there, but you will come, you who have never been part of it before. Not only will you be there, but we will perform before you the trial of the absent old man. And we will give you the pleasure of seeing us describe and submit to your judgment all the so-called corruption of his government!'"

"Truly, Sire, is that not what has taken place?"

Seeing the bishop's animation, the emperor had drawn closer. He listened spellbound, passing his hand over his forehead. Suddenly, he changed the direction of the conversation:

"But honestly, Monsignor, have I not given abundant proof of my goodwill toward religion? The Restoration of the monarchy itself did not do more than I have done."

With this remark the way was open, and the bishop, inspired, could express his own idea of what Christian politics should be, going straight to the principles that guide it.

"I am most eager to do justice to Your Majesty's religious dispositions, and I can quite appreciate, Sire, the services you have rendered to Rome and the Church, particularly in the first years of your government.

"Perhaps the Restoration did not do more than you. But allow me to add that neither the Restoration, nor you, have done for God what should have been done. Neither of you has raised up His throne. Neither of you has denied the principles of the Revolution, whose practical consequences you continue to fight because the social gospel that inspires the State is still the Declaration of the Rights of Man, which, Sire, is nothing other than the formal negation of the rights of God.

"Indeed, it is among the rights of God to rule over States as over individuals. It was for this alone that our Lord came upon the earth. He ought to reign here by inspiring our laws, sanctifying our morals, enlightening our teaching, directing our counsel, and ordering the actions of governments as of the governed. Everywhere that Jesus Christ does not reign, there is disorder and decadence.

"It is my duty to tell you that He does not reign among us and that our Constitution is not that of a Christian and a Catholic State–far from it. Our public law establishes that the Catholic religion is that of the majority of the French people, but it adds that all other religions have a right to an equal protection. Is that not tantamount to proclaiming that the Constitution equally protects truth and error? Well, Sire, do you know what Jesus Christ responds to governments who incur the guilt of such a contradiction? Jesus Christ, King of heaven and earth, answers them. 'I, too, O governments, who succeed yourselves the one upon the other, as you overthrow one another, I, too, grant you equal protection. I granted this protection to the Bourbon king, and the same to the Republic, and to you as well I accord the same protection.'"

The emperor stopped the bishop.

"But do you still imagine that in our day such a thing could exist, and that the moment has arrived to establish the exclusively religious reign that you demand? Do you not rather think, Monsignor, that such an action would unleash the most passionate opposition?"

The bishop of Poitiers had not spoken of an "exclusively religious reign," he had simply brought to light the divine prerogative to dominate every reign. The essential of the objection consisted in the "political expedience" that is always put first. He answered it with this solemn reply:

"Sire, when great men of politics like Your Majesty object that the moment has not come, I can only bow before their judgment, because I am not a great man of politics. But I am a bishop, and as a bishop, I answer them. 'The moment has not come for Jesus Christ to reign. In that case, the moment has not come for governments to endure.'"21

If only God would accord us, not a half-dozen, but a single shepherd of this mettle, and the quality of the air we breathe would be greatly improved.


Footnotes
1. June 2, 1835-August 20, 1914, pope from 1903-14. Defunctus adhuc loquitur refers to the sacrifice of Abel which still rises to heaven after his murder: "and by it he being dead yet speaketh" (Heb. 11:4).
2. La doctrine politique et sociale du cardinal Pie (Paris: Nouvelles Editions Latines, 1959) p. 362.
3. Actes de S.S. Pie X (Bonne Press), VII, 188.
4. Pages choisies du cardinal Pie (Paris-Poitiers: Oudin, 1916) 2 vol., Introduction, p. xi.
5. See also René Bazin, St. Pie X, 1928 edition, pp. 57-58.
6. You can read it in the Bulletin diocesain de Bayonne, December 1, 1918, pp. 597-598; No. 28 of Itineraires published it, p. 42; in the same review, Fr. Calmel cites it as well, in his article "Brumes du revelationisme" (No. 181, p. 182); Fr. Rifan referred to it in his sermon during the day of "BBR 1998"; Francis-Marie Algoud also cites it in Annex XVII, p. 480, of his book Histoire de la volonte de perversion de Vintelligence et des moeurs; and the 15th centenary of the baptism of Clovis, in 1996, provided a new occasion for a number of journals to reprint this prophecy, such as Sel de la Terre, No. 17, pp. 86-87.
7. Oeuvres de Monseigneur l'eveque de Poitiers (Paris-Poitiers: Oudin, 1886-1879) 1st edition, Vols. I to IX. The 10th edition was published by Leday, Paris, and contained l0 vols. (1890-1894).
8. Ibid., t. V, pp. 506-507.
9. Documents pontificaux de S.S. saint Pie X (Versailles: Courrier de Rome, 1993), Vol.11, pp. 396-397.
10. Oeuvres de Monseigneur l'eveque de Poitiers, I, 96-119.
11. Documents pontificaux de S.S. saint Pie X, Vol.1, pp.33 ff.
12. Oeuvres de Monseigneur I'eveque de Poitiers, VII, 68.
13. Ibid., V, 376-377.
14. Documents pontificaux de S.S. saint Pie X, Vol.11, pp.575-577.
15. Oeuvres de Monseigneur l'eveque de Poitiers, V, 154.
16. Published in Nos. 40 and 41 of the Bulletin catholique of the diocese of Montauban, October 2 and 9, 1915, pp. 339, 342.
17. Napoleon III was proclaimed emperor November 7, 1852, following the coup d'état of December 2, 1851, remaining emperor until his imprisonment by the Prussians at Sedan, August 30, 1870. The empire was overthrown a few days later and a republic was proclaimed, September 4, by Favre, Gambetta, and Ferry.
18. La Doctrine politique et sociale du cardinal Pie (Paris: Nouvelles Editions Latines, 1959), ch. XIII: "L'eveque, l'empereur and la question romaine," pp. 301-304.
19. Beginning in June 1849 (when Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, future Napoleon III, was president of the Republic), France had sent an expeditionary force into Italy–the Papal States–to support the pope who was being attacked by Italian "republican" forces. The French troops occupied Rome from July 3, 1849, to December 11, 1866. However, Napoleon III–himself a former carbonaro [Freemason]–wished to maintain his alliance with the House of Piedmont, [desirous of a secular, united Italy] and little by little weakened his policy of support for the papacy, letting the Piedmontese conquer Italy and invade the Pontifical States in 1860-61.
20.The Crimean expedition (1854-55) was composed of an alliance of French, English, Piedmontese, and Turkish troops, against the Russians.
21. These words were repeated before the French Chamber of Deputies, June 2, 1958, by a deputy, Mr. Guy Jarrosson. See the Journal Officiel, June 3, 1958.]]>