|
From the outset
of the election of Pius X, public opinion had it that this
new Pope was a religious Pope, in contrast to his immediate
predecessor, Leo XIII:
Leo XIII
has given back to the Church her rightful place in the
world which she had lost under Pope Pius IX's pontificate.
It would be logical that, by a contrary movement, there
should follow after a statesman [Pope Leo XIII] whose
interests had been turned toward the nations, an apostle
whose solicitude or primary concern would be for the faithful,....(Dansette,
Histoire religieuse de la France contemporaine,
Ed. Flammarion, p.317.)
Pius X brought
to the See of Peter a spirit quite different from that
of his predecessor. For all that the latter delighted
in those subtle political and diplomatic maneuvers, Pius
X had no taste at all for them, since he would in no way
bow to the compromises necessarily implicated in such
dealings; he had taken the firm decision of concentrating
himself on the problems concerning the apostolate and
Christian life (R. Aubert, Nouvelle histoire de l’Eglise,
T.V. Ed. Seuil, p.25).
There was this
common opinion prevailing at the time of Card. Sarto's election.
In his first
encyclical, E Supremi Apostolatus, St. Pius X declares:
We take courage
in Him Who strengthens Us; and setting Ourselves to work,
relying on the power of God, We proclaim that we have no
other program in the Supreme Pontificate but that of "restoring
all things in Christ" (Eph. 1:10), so that "Christ
may be all and in all" (Col. 3:2)....The desire for
peace is harbored in every breast, and there is no one who
does not ardently invoke it. But to want peace without God
is an absurdity, seeing that where God is absent thence
too justice flies, and when justice is taken away, it is
vain to cherish the hope of peace. "Peace is the work
of justice" (Is. 22:17). There are many, We are well
aware, who, in their yearning for peace, that is, for the
tranquility of order, band themselves into societies and
parties, which they style parties of order. Hope and labor
lost. For there is but one party of order capable of restoring
peace in the midst of all this turmoil, and that is the
party of God. It is this party, therefore, that We must
advance,....(Documents Pontificaux de Sa Sainteté
St. Pie X; Ed. Courrier de Rome, 1993).
Another one
of St. Pius X's encyclicals, Jucunda Sane (Mar. 12,
1904), is just as expressive of his concern to restore the
spiritual life amongst the faithful. It was published on
the occasion of the celebration of the 13th centenary solemnity
of Pope St. Gregory the Great. Here, he adopts the same
solution in the face of a similar dramatic situation: the
spiritual solution.
Truly wonderful
is the work he [i.e., Pope St. Gregory] was able to effect
during his reign of little more than thirteen years. He
was the restorer of Christian life in its entirety, stimulating
the devotion of the faithful, the observance of the monks,
the discipline of the clergy, the pastoral solicitude
of the bishops. Most prudent father of the family of Christ
that he was (Joann. Diac., Vita Greg., ii, 51),
he preserved and increased the patrimony of the Church.
A little farther
on, he writes again:
But it is,
nevertheless, true that he never put himself forward as
one invested with the might and power of the great ones
of the earth, for instead of using the exalted prestige
of the Pontifical dignity, he preferred to call himself
the Servant of the Servants of God; a title which
he was the first to adopt. It was not merely by profane
science or the "persuasive words of human wisdom"
(1 Cor. 2:4) that he traced out his career, or by the
devices of civil politics, or by systems of social renovation,
skillfully studied, prepared and put in execution; nor
yet, and this is very striking, by setting before himself
a vast program of apostolic action to be gradually realized;....(h)e
yet possessed an incredible energy of soul which was for
ever receiving fresh vigor from his lively faith in the
infallible words of Christ, and in His Divine promises.
Then again, he counted with unlimited confidence on the
supernatural force given by God to the Church for the
successful accomplishment of her divine mission in the
world. The constant aim of his life, as shown in all his
words and works, was, therefore, this: to preserve in
himself, and to stimulate in others this same lively faith
and confidence, doing all the good possible at the moment
in expectation of the Divine judgment (op. cit.)....It
is still more necessary to inculcate properly in the minds
of all the moral maxims taught by Jesus Christ, so that
everybody may learn to conquer himself, to curb the passions
of the mind, to stifle pride, to live in obedience to
authority, to love justice, to show charity towards all,
to temper with Christian love the bitterness of social
inequalities, to detach the heart from the goods of the
world, to live contented with the state in which Providence
has placed us, while striving to better it by the fulfillment
of our duties, to thirst after the future life in the
hope of eternal reward. But, above all, is it necessary
that these principles be instilled and made to penetrate
into the heart, so that true and solid piety may strike
root there, and all, but as men and as Christians, may
recognize by their acts, as well as by their words, the
duties of their state and have recourse with filial confidence
to the Church and her ministers to obtain from them pardon
for their sins, to receive the strengthening grace of
the sacraments, and to regulate their lives according
to the laws of Christianity (op. cit.).
In his first
two encyclicals, E Supremi Apostolatus and Jucunda
Sane, and again in his later encyclical, Communium
Rerum, St. Pius X demonstrated his essentially religious
concerns. Moreover, in these three documents, he paints
the same dramatic tableau of the prevailing situation: nothing
less than a universal apostasy, and the cures he proposes
are again the same (from Communium Rerum):
How they
have realized this danger is easily to be seen in the
anxieties, trepidations, and tears of most holy men who
have had borne in upon them the terrible responsibility
of the government of souls and the greatness of the danger
to which they are exposed, but it is to be seen most strikingly
in the life of Anselm. When he was torn from the solitude
of the studious life of the cloister, to be raised to
a lofty dignity in most difficult times, he found himself
a prey to the most tormenting solicitude and anxiety,
and chief of all the fear that he might not do enough
for the salvation of his own soul and the souls of his
people, for the honor of God and of His Church....[h]is
one great comfort was his trust in God and in the Apostolic
See (Epistol. lib. iii. ep. 37).
St. Pius X
was a true pastor of souls, a pope who concerned himself
first and foremost with the care of souls, a spiritual rather
than a politically-wise pope. It would, however, be false
to pretend that St. Pius X's pontificate was of an exclusively
religious character, where politics had no part to play
whatsoever. Aventino (op. cit.) states positively:
Pius X's
eminently religious pontificate cannot be seen as completely
detached from all political activity whatsoever. Anxious
as he was in pursuing an essentially religious goal, Pius
X's actions would never be of an exclusively political
nor diplomatic character; it could never be but politico-religious;
and under no circumstances whatsoever would moral or religious
questions be subordinate to any worldly conditions; this
he proved when he fearlessly raised the cross against
the politics of religious interference in France and in
Spain, as well as against the Russian government's arbitrary
pretensions or claims. Far from dealing a death-blow to
his courage, drawn from the everflowing supernatural sources
of the Faith, the most dreadful obstacles simply served
to redouble his energy and to give him the strength to
rekindle everyone else's courage.
These words,
addressed to Card. Fisher in 1911, repeat exactly what Pius
X had penned in Jucunda Sane (1904).
Each and
every time Catholic interests will be threatened, the
Pope will be immediately ready to defend them against
the Republique du Bloc or against the Czar's autocracy;
against the Catholic monarchy and parliament of Spain
or against the all-powerful German Protestant Empire,
against the usurping monarchy of Savoy or against the
very Catholic House of Hapsburg. The on-going religious
struggle in France, the defense of Catholicism in Russia,
the padlock law in Spain, the affair concerning the archbishopric
of Posen in Germany, those incidents related to Nathan
and Granito all reveal the unity of method as well as
the unity of thought of the Sovereign Pontiff in all circumstances
(op. cit., pp.143,144).
|
|
|
Our Apostolic Mandate
(letter of St. Pius X on The Sillon).
Available from Angelus
Press. |
St. Pius X's
pontificate was a politico-religious one; and, in this regard,
four of his official documents are quite characteristic
indeed. The first of them is his famous consistorial speech,
Primum Vos (Nov. 9, 1903):
Our task,
therefore, consists in defending both Christian Truth
as well as the Law of Christ. Consequently, Ours will
be the task of defining and explaining the notions of
the most important truths....as well as that of leading
back to the rule and straight path of honesty both in
public and in private life, in the social and political
spheres, all men and, indeed, each and every one of them,
those who must obey as well as those whose duty is to
command, for they are all sons of the same Father Who
is in Heaven. We are also quite conscious of the fact
that some will be shocked in hearing Us mention that We
will, through necessity, concern Ourselves with politics.
But anyone seeking to judge fairly will be quick to understand
that the Sovereign Pontiff, who has been invested with
the Supreme Magisterium, has no right whatsoever of divorcing
questions relating to politics from the field of Faith
and Morals. Moreover, in his capacity as chief and sovereign
guide of that perfect society which is the Catholic Church,
a society made up of men and also set up amongst men,
he can only wish to foster and entertain close relationships
with [all] heads of countries and members of governments
if he wishes to see all the countries of the world protect
their Catholic citizens' liberty and security.
A second document,
just as characteristic, is the address delivered on the
occasion of the beatification ceremonies of St. Joan of
Arc (Apr. 19, 1909):
Having everything
in common with Him, enriched by Him and possessor as well
as guardian of Truth, the Catholic Church alone may claim
the love and veneration of all peoples.
Thus it is
that anyone rising up against the Church's authority under
the unjust excuse that it is invading the State's domain
is, in fact, limiting and shackling the Truth; he who
declares the Church to be a stranger in his nation is
also, in fact, declaring that Truth is indeed a stranger
in his country; he who fears that the Church will weaken
the liberty as well as the greatness of his country must
also admit that a people can be great and free without
Truth. No, such a State or government, by whatever name
it is known, while waging war against Truth and gravely
offending that which is most sacred in men, cannot possibly
lay claim to their love....Only that country united in
a chaste alliance with the Church can inspire its citizens
with those sentiments of veneration and love and bring
about the true well-being of humanity.
The third document
is found in the famous condemnation of the Sillon
(Aug. 25, 1910):
It is in
the democratic customs as well as in theories of the ideal
city which inspires them, that you will perceive, Venerable
Brethren, those underlying causes of those disciplinary
lapses for which you have so often reproached the Sillon.
Thus did the
Pope roundly condemn a political party, that Christian Democracy
established by Marc Sangnier (1873-1950).
The fourth
document, Il Fermo Proposito (June 11, 1905), manifests
the Pope's worries which are seen to be not exclusively
religious, but rather of a politico-religious nature.
In this encyclical
on Catholic Action in Italy, St. Pius X declares:
Behold, Venerable
Brethren, the precious support brought to the Church by
those chosen companies of Catholics who propose, as a
matter of fact, to combine all their living strength with
the firm intention of doing battle by just and legal means
against the growing anti-Christian forces in modern society,
as well as to repair by all possible means, all of those
extremely grave disorders brought about in our midst by
those same forces of darkness. These same associations
intend bringing back Jesus Christ into families, schools
and society itself as well as re-establishing the principle
of human authority as representing that [authority] of
God. Those militant Catholics are therefore devoting themselves
to bringing public laws in conformity with justice, to
correcting or suppressing those which are lacking in that
virtue as well as defending and supporting with a genuinely
Catholic spirit the rights of God in all things, together
with the no less sacred rights of His Church.
This last quotation
shows how Pope St. Pius X envisaged "Restoring all
things in Christ." This is evidently a question of
a religious policy whose politics will be subject to the
unchanging and saving doctrines of the Church.
However, since
St. Pius X was Pope and head of the universal Church, it
was necessary that he consider religion itself first and
foremost since this is the summit of all human life. This
subordination impregnates all of that Pope's writings, including
Pascendi. St. Pius X revealed the gravity of the
error of modernism both on the natural and supernatural
orders. Pascendi begins with an analysis of the modernist
system of philosophy which is agnosticism [i.e., the philosophy
of the agnostics, that is, of those teaching that the essences
of things and in particular the first cause and final ends,
are absolutely unknowable]. Modernism has proven itself
to be the ruin of all of human life, and therefore also
the ruin of that necessary subordination of politics to
religion, of the State to the Catholic Church.
In order to
illustrate this affirmation, let us examine Pascendi
point by point:
Pope St. Pius
X roundly condemns the seven heads of modernism and then
offers us their seven remedies. He begins by condemning
philosophers who challenge all rational proof of the existence
of God as the First Cause of everything in existence, both
material and spiritual. Such philosophers fall victims to
a so-called scientific atheism. For these, God is something
emanating from man's subconscious. This false "faith"
of theirs, based as it is on mere sentiment or feelings,
is expressed in ever-changing formulae, since these have
no other objective than that of maintaining or of warming
up over and over again a sentimental life, a life of the
heart which is, by definition, irrational. For these people,
religion is a form of life and, as such, cannot constitute
an adherence to an exterior object. Their "faith"
proceeds from man; known as religious immanence, vital immanence.
Such I a system of "belief" cannot possibly be
viewed as an unmistakably clear knowledge above all scientific
knowledge; on the contrary, science, which modernists have
reduced to the level of measurable things, is done to impose
its control on all human judgment.
St. Pius X
then goes on to condemn modernist theologians. Since modernists
are not concerned with true knowledge but rather with feelings
[sentiments] and immanence - [i.e., the teaching that the
foundation of faith must be sought in an internal sense
which arises from man's need of God], and since they no
longer have any external object to adhere to, the modern
theologians have simply become begetters of symbols, designed
to represent the divine emanating from human subconscious.
They also consider that the Magisterium's sole function
is that of transmitting or passing on common opinions. Their
cult thus ends up being a humanistic expression of religious
feelings. The modernist Church, for its part, is now seen
as the collective conscience in the same way that popular
regimes constitute the public conscience: and only the democratic
form is considered suitable to their ends. Thus we end up
with the error of separation of the Church and of the State.
In fact, since modernists hold Faith to be subject to human
knowledge [science] and reason, to the total advantage of
[human] reasoning and to the vanishing point of Faith, the
Church is seen to be subject to the collective conscience
which constitutes what may be essentially called an all-encompassing
Christian democracy, that is to say, the State. Understood
in this way, authority becomes nothing more than a service
whose mission is limited to the taking of the "universal
pulse" in order to explain it in a formula comprehensible
to everyone.
Pope St. Pius
X, showing modernism to be agnostic, immanentist, and evolutionary,
concludes:
The domineering
overbearance of those who teach the errors, and the thoughtless
compliance of the more shallow minds who assent to them,
create a corrupted atmosphere which penetrates everywhere,
and carries its infection with it. (Pascendi, 34).
He also went
on to reveal their common cause: pride.
Pride! Pride
sits in Modernism as in its own house, finding sustenance
everywhere in its doctrines and lurking in its every aspect.
(Pascendi, 40).
St. Thomas
Aquinas describes the sin of pride in the following terms:
The first
sin committed by the devil was that residing in an undue
desire to be "like to God," in that he sought
as the ultimate goal of his happiness something to which
he could attain by his own natural powers, without having
recourse to God, nor wishing to wait, as did the holy
angels, for his final perfection through divine grace.
This final perfection he sought to reach through the resources
of his own nature, not, indeed, independently of God,
Who gave to the angelic nature the ability to act, but
independently of God Who confers grace (De Malo,
16,3).
For man, as
well as for angels, pride consists in refusing the supernatural
and the order of divine grace. But for us, the supernatural
and grace depend on the mystery of the Incarnation whose
motive is to be found in sin. (Summa Theologica,
Part III, Question 1, article 3). Finally, it must be said
that pride is centered on that refusal of mercy, on that
refusal of the world of divine grace, that refusal of the
Incarnation, that refusal of Our Redeemer, the Word made
Incarnate.
Then, in the
second part of his encyclical, the Pope proffers a remedy
for this terrible and frightening evil. Having distinguished
seven heads of modernism, he then proposes seven corresponding
remedies, the first one being the restoration of the philosophy
of the Angelic Doctor, the universal Doctor of the Church,
who must remain the master of philosophy. St. Pius X absolutely
insists on this primacy:
We admonish
professors to bear well in mind that they cannot set aside
St. Thomas Aquinas, especially in metaphysical questions,
without grave disadvantage (Pascendi, 45).
In his motu
proprio of June 29, 1914, St. Pius X applied himself
to the solid formation of future priests, an essential remedy:
Equal diligence
and severity are to be used in examining and selecting
candidates for Holy Orders. For, far from the clergy be
the love of novelty! God hateth the proud and obstinate
mind (Pascendi, 49).
Next follows
the necessary prohibition of bad books. And the Pope then
carefully warns:
Let all this
be done in a fitting manner, and in certain cases it will
suffice to restrict the prohibition to the clergy (Pascendi,
51).
The fourth
measure consists in the control of publications through
the obligation of the Nihil obstat and the Imprimatur.
Ecclesiastical censors will be appointed for the revision
of works intended for publication.
St. Pius X
warns against religious congresses. In the future, these
will be rarely held, since they have been known to be the
means of spreading modernist infection:
Whenever
they [the bishops] do permit them, it shall only be on
condition that matters appertaining to the Bishops or
the Apostolic See be not treated in them, and that no
resolutions or petitions be allowed that would imply an
usurpation of sacred authority, and that absolutely nothing
be said in them which savors of Modernism, presbyterianism,
or laicism (Pascendi, 54).
The sixth remedy
is the setting up of diocesan "Councils of Vigilance"
established with rules identical to those of censors whose
task it is to examine writings pertaining to religious matters.
Finally, it
is ordained that bishops furnish the Holy See with a diligent
and sworn report on the things which have been decreed in
Pascendi.
Just as pride,
as a common cause, masks the various errors making up Modernism,
so another common cause is evident in their antidotes -
the Pope's jealous attention and solicitude for his priests,
not only in Pascendi, but in all of his encyclicals.
For example,
in his first encyclical, E Supremi Apostolatus, St.
Pius X proposes, as a first step in...
...bringing
back to loyal obedience to the Church all of those societies
bewildered and straying far away from the Wisdom of Christ,
to form and mold Christ in those who, through that duty
associated with their sublime vocation, are destined to
form Him in others. Here, We wish to speak of priests....Thus,
Venerable Brethren, how great indeed must be your solicitude
in forming the clergy to holiness! No other task is to
take precedence over this one....Let your zealous solicitude
be lavished on those new priests just leaving their seminaries.
In Jucunda
Sane, St. Pius X follows in the steps of St. Gregory:
The very
idea of some danger, the very thought that the moral corruption
so prevalent and pervading in the Roman world threatened
to creep into the morals and customs of the clergy caused
him no end of trembling and fear....He could be seen warning,
correcting and suspending from their functions those unworthy
members of the clergy....Thus do we see, Venerable Brethren,
how important it is for a bishop, before laying hands
on new candidates for ordination, to apply himself, in
God's presence, to a deep and thorough self-examination.
Finally, a
third example found in Communium Rerum, the encyclical
from which we have quoted regarding St. Anselm's 8th centenary:
Why so much
insistence in setting up and extolling once again St.
Anselm's merits? The reason, Venerable Brethren, lies
in this happy occasion afforded Us to exhort you once
again to open up to our young clergy those saving sources
of Christian knowledge; let those young clerics come and
drink at those beneficial and salutary waters revealed
by St. Anselm of Canterbury and so enriched by the Doctor
of Aquinas....There are those who have abandoned these
studies or else have undertaken them in a slipshod manner,
totally lacking in sure and firm methodical order. And
with what results? Alas! We see only too well all of the
ruins piling up all around us day after day; many are
they who, even amongst the clergy, without any aptitude
and utterly wanting in proper preparation, have not feared
to rashly debate and argue the loftiest Mysteries of the
Faith.
In order to
point out the jealous care St. Pius X had for the clergy,
we quote from Haerent Animo (Aug. 4, 1908):
Through this
exhortation, it is not only your interests that We will
uphold, but also those common interests of Catholic nations,
since they cannot at all be separated the ones from the
others.
Would to
God that there should now be a greater number of men practicing
these virtues as did those saints of times past who proved
to be so powerful in words and deeds, for the greater
profit not only of Religion, but also for that of civil
society...
When, at
last, the true spirit of priestly vocations will have
renewed and improved at all levels of the clergy, our
other projects and efforts of reform, whatever they may
be, will also prove to be, with God's help, much more
effective indeed.
Thus are we
able to conclude that in the same way that pride is found
to be the common cause of the seven heads of modernism and
that this pride simply constitutes man's refusal of Christ
as his Redeemer, thus is also to be found a common remedy
to this tragedy: priestly virtue. Why? Precisely because
the priest participates directly in Christ's work of salvation,
and because he is a man dispensing the sacraments of the
Faith. This is where we behold the unrivalled splendor of
the Pope's motto: To restore everything in Christ. In short,
this means restoring everything in Christ the Redeemer,
and therefore also restoring everything through the holy
priesthood. Included in this "everything" is not
only the Church, but all of human society as well. This
universal restoration will come via Christ the Redeemer,
and therefore by our priests. And this term "everything"
is not restricted in any way at all. This remedy is not
something new. St. Pius X ushered in nothing new; he just
took up again a centuries-old idea, making his own the constant
care of earlier Popes. He took up once again and continued
the work of one former Pope in particular, Gregory VII.
Here is what he wrote about St. Anselm.
He was still
but a curate when he received from the great and courageous
Roman Pontiff, Gregory VII, letters full of esteem and
affection wherein the Pope recommended himself as well
as the Catholic Church to the saint's [i.e., Anselm's]
good prayers.
"We will
cite but one name," says St. Pius X. "That person
of indomitable courage, indefatigable defender of the rights
and freedom of the Church, that watchful guardian and preserver
of Church discipline, Pope Gregory VII."
Now, precisely
in this encyclical where St. Pius X quotes Gregory VII,
he very frequently returns to Pascendi, specifying:
What We wish
to simply draw to your attention today is the fact that,
if the dangers of which We speak are graver and more menacing
nowadays, they are not, for all that, very different from
those which threatened the Church and its doctrines in
St. Anselm's days.
The conclusion
of all this is easily drawn: if the ills plaguing the Church
in Anselm's time (1033-1109) were the same as those of today,
even though they are not of the same extent nor violence,
the remedy is yet the same. It is the one proposed by the
Pope of the dawn of the 11th century, that is to say, of
St. Gregory VII.
Thus do we
have St. Pius X following in the footsteps of Pope St. Gregory
VII. To the same ills and dangers, the same remedies. St.
Pius X is to the 20th century what St. Gregory VII was to
the 11th century.
The measures
taken by St. Pius X, although of the same order, were taken
in different circumstances. Whereas at the time of Pope
Gregory VII all of those States were Christian, and therefore
by definition subject to Church authority, in this 20th
century, no State admits of such dependency of politics
on the Church. St. Pius X's action was therefore much more
limited, and yet the principles involved were essentially
the same. Only the actual carrying out of this Pontiff's
orders was much more restricted. Unlike Gregory VII, who
was able to excommunicate Henry IV and relieve that emperor's
subjects from their oaths to him, St. Pius X had no other
means at his disposal, whenever a government refused to
be "subordinated" to the Church, refused its authority
or even rebelled against it, than to declare that the citizens
were no longer obliged to sentiments of veneration and affection,
which they should have under normal circumstances. These
are the words of the Pope in his address at the beatification
of St. Joan of Arc (Apr. 9, 1909):
Thus is it
to be seen that anyone revolting against the Church's
authority under the unjust pretext that it is encroaching
on the State's domain, is indeed thereby imposing limits
to the Truth. He who holds it [i.e., the Church's authority]
to be a stranger in a nation is also declaring that Truth
must also be held to be something foreign in that nation.
Those who fear that it will weaken the freedom and greatness
of a people, are also obliged to admit that a people can
be great and free without Truth. No, such a State, such
a government or whatever other name may be given to it,
cannot lay claim to its citizens' affection, because in
waging war against Truth, it gravely strikes at that which
is found to be most sacred in man. Such a government will
be able to sustain itself through material and brute force;
it will make itself feared through the sword; people will,
through hypocrisy, self-interest or sheer slavishness:
the people will obey because religion preaches and ennobles
submission to the human powers that be, as long as they
do not require that which is contrary to the holy laws
of God. But if the fulfillment of these duties towards
human authorities, in that which is compatible with the
people's duty to God, renders their obedience more meritorious,
it will not, for all that, become more tender, nor more
joyful nor more spontaneous: never will it even deserve
to be considered as venerable nor affectionate.
St. Pius X
assures us that these sentiments of veneration and affection
can only be inspired by that country which, united in a
chaste alliance with the Catholic Church, brings about the
genuine good of humanity.
Those terrible
evils shaking the Church at the onset of the 20th century
resemble those which Gregory VII found himself obliged to
correct. They can all be summed up in one word: laicization.
However, the
partisans of destruction are not only to be found outside
the Church; they are unfortunately to be seen at their work
of demolition in the very bosom of the Catholic Church.
It is interesting
to note that the stress laid in Gregory VII's first letters
is quite similar to that found in those of St. Pius X. Writing
to Lanfranc of Canterbury, Gregory VII informs him:
As for the
Bishops, whose sacred duty it is to guide and watch over
those souls confided to them, they only seek, with insatiable
desire, worldly glory and pleasures of the flesh. Not
only do they destroy the last traces of holiness and all
religious life in themselves, but through their bad example,
they lead their flocks to all manner of evils. You are
well aware how perilous it would be for Our soul not to
combat them; but you also know how difficult it is to
resist them and to restrain their malice.
Somewhat later,
writing to Sicard the patriarch of Aquileia:
Your sound
reasoning cannot ignore how mountainous waves of fury
are relentlessly battering the Bark of the Church: to
the point where she appears to be swamped and wrecked.
The great and powerful, together with the princes of this
world, selfishly seeking their own interests at the expense
of those of Jesus Christ, have cast off all respect and
are now oppressing the Church like an abject slave: they
have no shame in covering her in confusion as long as
they are able thereby to satisfy their monstrous greed.
Priests, as well as those charged with governing the Church,
are seen to have almost utterly abandoned divine law,
as they steal away from their sacred duties towards God
and their flocks. Their ecclesiastical dignities only
serve to cover them in worldly glory as they grievously
squander away in vain pomps of pride and uncalled-for
expenses, those funds which normally should be directed
to the salvation and welfare of the majority.
Caught up
in such chaos, the people, without their prelates' leadership,
deprived of those good counsels which could guide it in
the ways of justice, is now, on the contrary, thanks to
the bad example of its leaders, pushed on toward every
mischief and everything contrary to the Christian religion,
and is seen rushing headlong into all sorts of iniquity.
We can then
only quote Communium Rerum once again to witness
that the policies pursued by St. Pius X were similar to
those of St. Gregory VII:
Let us go
back (in mind) to the times of Anselm, so fraught with
misfortunes and difficulties according to historical accounts.
People then were indeed obliged to give battle for the
altar and the fatherland, that is to say, in favor of
the inviolability of public rights and laws, for liberty,
civilization and doctrine: all things over which the Church
alone stood guard. It was necessary to repress the tyranny
of those princes accustomed as they are in disregarding
the people's most sacred rights: Vices had to be eradicated,
intellects cultivated and barbarians civilized. Much work
had to be done in reforming part of the clergy, guilty
of cowardice or misconduct: numerous were they in its
ranks who, owing their appointment to the base intrigues
and whims of those princes, have shown themselves to be
their time-serving subordinates.
Such was
the situation, particularly in those regions which especially
and more immediately benefited from Anselm's solicitude,
works, doctrinal teachings, as well as his sterling example
of monastic life. The souls entrusted to his care greatly
benefited by his heedful vigilance as well as the industrious
zeal he showed in faithfully fulfilling his functions
of archbishop and primate.
On all sides,
interior revolutions together with foreign wars were inevitably
followed by a loosening of discipline: princes and subjects,
clergy and laity; all were affected, none escaping.
The greatest
minds of that century never ceased deploring such abuses
and, most noteworthy amongst them was Anselm's former
teacher and predecessor on the See of Canterbury, Lanfranc.
But, above and beyond all others, the Roman Pontiffs raised
their voices. We will recall but one name: he who bore
it was a man of indomitable courage, the indefatigable
champion of the Church's rights and liberty, the vigilant
guardian and savior of ecclesiastical discipline, Pope
Gregory VII.
The restoration
is identical for both Popes: it consists in a genuine reform
of the Catholic priesthood. It has become necessary to renew
priestly powers, in order to triumph over all things; therefore
over all of human societies subject to Christ the Redeemer.
Omnia instaurare in Christo, and thereby affirm the
Roman Church's indispensable supremacy, for there is no
true civilization but Christianity resting upon the Catholic
priesthood.
If those evils
plaguing this 20th century are of the same order as those
familiar to St. Anselm under the pontificate of Pope St.
Gregory VII, the remedies must also once again be the same.
Now, the greatest evil of our times is that of laicization
or secularism. The remedies will therefore also necessarily
be the same, those proposed by Pope Gregory VII: restoration
of the powers of the Catholic priesthood for the restoration
of Christ kingdom on earth.
Fr. Benedict
de Jorna
(Superior
of the District of France, Society of Saint Pius X)
Courtesy of the Angelus
Press, Kansas City, MO 64109
translated from the Italian
Fr. Du Chalard
Via Madonna degli Angeli, 14
Italia 00049 Velletri (Roma)
|
