Three Reasons the Church’s Enemies Hate The Immaculate Conception

TFP ^ | 12.08.06 | Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

[Coleus]

The following text is adapted from a lecture Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira gave on June 15, 1973.  It has been translated and edited for publication without his revision.  Note, in this text, he uses the words Revolution and Counter-Revolution as he defined them in his book Revolution and Counter-Revolution.  In this sense, the Revolution is a centuries-old process, motivated by pride and sensuality, and therefore egalitarianism and liberalism, that dominates the modern world and seeks to destroy Christian civilization.  Counter-Revolutionaries are those dedicated to defeating this process and defending the rights of God. –Ed.

…One of the truly Counter-Revolutionary acts of Pope Pius IX’s pontificate was the proclamation of the Immaculate Conception. 

There are three reasons the definition of this dogma was especially Counter-Revolutionary and therefore hateful to the enemies of the Church.  

First Reason: An Anti-Egalitarian Dogma
As you know, this dogma teaches that Our Lady was immaculate at her conception, meaning that, at no moment, did she have even the slightest stain of Original Sin. Both she, and naturally Our Lord Jesus Christ, were exempt from that rigid law that subjugates all other descendants of Adam and Eve.  Thus, Our Lady was not subject to the miseries of fallen man.  She did not have bad influences, inclinations and tendencies.  In her, everything moved harmonically towards truth, goodness and therefore God.  In this sense, Our Lady is an example of perfect liberty, meaning that everything her reason, illuminated by Faith, determined as good, her will desired entirely.  She had no interior obstacles to impede her practice of virtue.

Being “full of grace” increased these effects.  Thus, her will advanced with an unimaginable impetus towards everything that was true and good.  Declaring that a mere human creature had this extraordinary privilege makes this dogma fundamentally anti-egalitarian, because it points out an enormous inequality in the work of God.  It demonstrates the total superiority of Our Lady over all other beings.  Thus, its proclamation made Revolutionary egalitarian spirits boil with hatred.

Second Reason: The Unsullied Purity of Our Lady
However, there is a more profound reason why the Revolution hates this dogma.  The Revolution loves evil and is in harmony with those who are bad, and thus tries to find evil in everything.  On the contrary, those who are irreproachable are a cause of intense hatred.  Therefore, the idea that a being could be utterly spotless from the first moment of her existence is abhorrent to Revolutionaries.  For example: Imagine a man who is consumed with impurity.  When besieged by impure inclinations, he is ashamed of his consent to them.  This leaves him depressed and utterly devastated.

Imagine this man considering Our Lady, who, being the personification of transcendental purity, did not have even the least appetite for lust.  He feels hatred and scorn because her virtue smashes his pride.  Furthermore, by declaring Our Lady to be so free from pride, sensuality and the desire for anything Revolutionary, the proclamation of the Immaculate Conception affirmed that she was utterly Counter-Revolutionary.  This only inflamed the Revolutionary hatred of the dogma all the more.

Disputing the Doctrine: A Counter-Revolutionary Struggle

Declaring that Our Lady was so free from pride, sensuality and the desire for anything Revolutionary, affirmed that she was utterly Counter-Revolutionary and inflamed the Revolutionary hatred of the dogma all the more.

For centuries, there were two opposing currents of thought about the Immaculate Conception in the Church.  While it would be an exaggeration to suggest that everyone who fought against the doctrine was acting with Revolutionary intentions; it is a fact that all those who were acting with Revolutionary intentions fought against it.  On the other hand, all those who favored its proclamation, at least on that point, expressed a Counter-Revolutionary attitude. Thus, in some way the fight between the Revolution and Counter-Revolution was present in the fight between these two theological currents.

Third Reason:  The Exercise of Papal Infallibility
There is still another reason this dogma is hateful to Revolutionaries: it was the first dogma proclaimed through Papal Infallibility.  At that time, the dogma of Papal Infallibility had not yet been defined and there was a current in the Church maintaining that the Pope was only infallible when presiding over a council.  Nevertheless, Pius IX invoked Papal Infallibility when he defined the Immaculate Conception after merely consulting some theologians and bishops.   For liberal theologians, this seemed like circular reasoning.  If his infallibility had not been defined, how could he use it?  On the contrary, by using his infallibility, he affirmed that he had it.

This daring affirmation provoked an explosion of indignation among Revolutionaries, but enormous enthusiasm among Counter-Revolutionaries.  In praise of the new dogma, children all over the world were baptized under the name: Conception, Concepcion or Concepta to consecrate them to the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady.

Pius IX: Bringing the Fight to the Enemy
It is not surprising that Pius IX so adamantly affirmed Papal Infallibility.  Very different from those who succeeded him, he was ever ready to bring the fight to the enemy.  He did this in Geneva, Switzerland, which then was the breeding ground of Calvinism, which is the most radical form of Protestantism.  When Swiss laws changed to allow a Catholic Cathedral in Geneva, Pius IX ordered that a statue of the Immaculate Conception be placed in the middle of the city, to proclaim this dogma in the place where Calvinists, Lutherans and other Protestants denied it more than anywhere else.  This is an example of Pius IX’s leadership in the fight against the Revolution. It is therefore entirely proper that all Catholics entertain a special affection for the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, which is so detested by the enemies of the Church today.

To read another commentary on the Immaculate Conception, click here.
To read Fr. Saint-Laurent's commentary on the Immaculate Conception, click here.
To order your free copy of a picture of Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception, click here.

[DungeonMaster]

Ping to 208.

[Pyro7480]

No, it really isn't. If you're basing your argument on that verse, then it is relevant.

[Frank Sheed]

Nice backhand. Can you volley too?

[stfassisi]

"but free will alone cannot save us."

Agreed.
I,m not sure how or if you came to that conclusion from post #185?

The most important thing about free will is this...
We must overcome ourself and let ourself be completely guided by Christ-in order to do this we excersize our Free will to drop the question from our minds as to"what is in it for "ME" and to "what do "I" get out of it"

This is what you will find most in common amongst all the Saints.A Saint is someone who loves God,s will,someone who embraces what God has willed for them,even through severe persecution you will find that Saints held strongly to the will of God.

from the word of Saint Thomas Aquinas

"The Passions are Powers given to man to attain what is good for him in this world.
But they must under the control of reason and will.
And this control must be in the direction of moral good, else the passions will lead man astray."

[adiaireton8]

Therefore...if it is not in the scriptures...it is not so.

"2+2=4" is not in Scripture. Do you think it is therefore false?

"DungeonMaster exists" is not in Scripture. Do you think it is therefore false that you exist?

-A8

[Frank Sheed]

Time for a tagline change.

You asked for a tagline change. You can't even defend the Scriptura you are purporting to Sola. You know full well that the Canon is not contained or enumerated anywhere in the Canon. Thus, I suggest you do likewise...change your tagline, that is. For further reference, see Dave Armstrong's latest book available from Amazon.com, I believe. Or, visit here: Bible Chistianity Society

[Frank Sheed]

Most excellent, FRiend!

[trisham]

Here's a photo of the Vatican at Christmas, for those of us who may need a break. :)

[Iscool]

Thus, hatred of the Blessed Virgin is demonic in origin. She removes souls from the abyss--souls who would otherwise be food for the devil. Satan goes hungry because The Blessed Mother is crushing its head. Blessed be Our Lady of Guadalupe!

I can understand you believing this...I can even understand you posting this in a Catholic Caucus thread...But I am amazed you would post it in a public forum...

Mary did not crush anyone's head...Mary does not remove souls from anywhere...

If you want to tell us that Mary prefers Pepsi over Orange Crush, fine...No one can dispute that...But don't twist and wrest the scripture and tell us something ridiculous like Mary crushed Satan's head...There is no reference to Mary anywhere in the Book of Genesis...

[nanetteclaret]

St. Luke was talking about the Old Testament, that the new converts searched the prophecies to find out if what the Apostles were saying was true (that the prophecies had been fulfilled).

What you are saying makes no sense, because only half of the New Testament had even been written when St. Luke wrote Acts (+/- 65 A.D.). The Gospel of John, John's three Epistles, and Revelation were not written until +/- 95 A.D., and 7 Epistles plus the Gospel of Matthew were written in between.

In addition, there were many other writings which were written in this time period which had been circulated and stsudied but which were later not included in the Canon of Scripture. The Canon was not even decided until the late 300's A.D., so that's +/- 250 years of Christianity without a definite list of what comprised Holy Scripture. The Church got along for 250 years by the oral teaching of the Apostles(tradition), handed down to their successors, the bishops. As St. Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 2:5: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."

[xzins]

God does not predestine to sin

Judas is clearly prophesied according to the Apostle Peter. Peter cites Psalms 69 & 109. Other prophesies speak of the betrayal for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah.)

Judas purpose for being was fixed by God and announced 9 & 5 hundred years ahead of time.... so that Judas had no choice but to betray the Lord.

It appears that God will predestine people to sin.

Jesus addressed the case of Judas and said that Judas was lost so that scripture could be fulfilled.

God can do with any of us as He chooses. Like any shepherd, He can slaughter some sheep and fleece others. It is the choice of the Shepherd, not of the sheep.

[Iscool]

No, it's like "you guys" are so blinded by hatered of Mary, that you never miss a chance to belittle her.

You clowns think "full of grace" means Mary was 'kinda nice'.

I haven't seen anyone belittle Mary yet...Problem is, you don't like it when someone kicks your god (goddess)...And I think you're the one that doesn't understand 'Grace'...

God gave Mary the grace to go thru pregnancy and childbirth without the benefit of a human male involved...And no doubt, that would take all the grace God could muster...

Has nothing to do with Mary being born sinless...Or being a co-redemtrix, (is that the word you guys invented?)...Has nothing to do with Mary being given authority to save people...Or, even be the OTHER mediator between man and God...

Looking at your church from the outside, it's interesting to see what's important to you folks...From an observer position, I'd say the most important thing in your religious structure is your 'church'...2nd in the order of importance would be Mary...3rd, I'm undecided...Either the pope or Jesus...And 4th, the other one...

And there's nothing biblical about that either...

[DungeonMaster]

The subject is of the concept of sola scriptura is in the bible, not the source of the bible.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Lord, I thank you for the gift of Mary. She gives me an example of a life perfectly united to your will. Help me today to live as she did, to give myself without thinking of myself, and to be open to what you want to do through me today

God says what he wants you to do today is go on FR and proclaim anyone who doesn't believe as you an enemy of the Church. That would be the loving thing to do. lol.

[xzins]

It's in John 17, IIRC. (In any case between John 16-18)

[DungeonMaster]

"2+2=4" is not in Scripture. Do you think it is therefore false?

Obviously not the topic of the scriptural search and yet another subject change.

[DungeonMaster]

Strange and very defensive reply.

[nanetteclaret]

Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

[Iscool]

To illustrate this absurdity: By this sola scriptura standard, the nearly two decades between the Lord's visit to the Temple and the start of His public ministry is mentioned nowhere, so it must not have happened or else it would be in scripture.

In his Gospel, John specifically states that the Lord performed other miracles that ARE NOT INCLUDED in scripture.

You miss the point...If it was important for us to know the details, it would have been in the scripture...

[adiaireton8]

You're the one who said: "Therefore...if it is not in the scriptures...it is not so." If you don't really mean that, then you need to qualify your claim, otherwise, you're calling false all those known truths which are not contained in Scripture.

-A8