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.

[kawaii]

Read Timothy.

It makes it clear that scripture was transmitted orally.

[nanetteclaret]

Luke 1:2, 4
"Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; that thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed."

Instructed = word of mouth.

[Iscool]

I will soon be leading a Bible Study on the Book of Revelation; we just finished one on the Gospel of Mark. What say you now?

How are you going to lead a bible study when you don't believe it??? You don't believe in the millenial reign of Christ...You don't believe the Bride of Christ get married in Heaven...You somehow think the 'Woman' in Rev. 12 is Mary...

You're not teaching the Word of God...You're teaching the Catholic church's private interpretation of God's word...

[Iscool]

Sorry, but one of the names for Mary in reference to the Old Testament is "woman." Stop taking the Bible so literally and check out the references, please.

Stop taking the bible literally and pretend the 'truth' is in your church...No thanks...

Doesn't it seem odd to you that folks that DO take God's Word literally couldn't possible join your church???

[Salvation]

And you are a proponent of your own personal interpretation of Scripture. (YOPIOS)

[wagglebee]

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

Actually, I think YOU miss the point:

Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God: and that believing, you may have life in his name. (John 20:30-31)

The Gospels were written to prove the Divinity of Christ and His Sacrifice for our Salvation. St. John obviously did not feel that adding these things were necessary to accomplish his task, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THESE EVENTS DID NOT OCCUR or that they weren't important. The Gospels, Acts and Epistles were written to ensure the Message of the Lord, events surrounding the Blessed Mother could be excluded because they were not necessary for Church doctrine, THAT DOES NOT MAKE THEM UNTRUE.

But let's look a little further at what IS in scripture:

And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. (Luke 1:42)

What is the "Blessing" that Elizabeth is referring to? Because it is obvious that the Blessed Virgin Mary and Jesus enjoy the SAME BLESSING. So what could it be? Naturally, it cannot be Divinity, because nobody thinks that Mary was divine. Nor can it be that they are both "saved" because Christ did not require Salvation. In short, the only possible thing that it could mean is that both Mary and her Son were by Nature free from the stain of sin. From the first chapter of Luke, the logical conclusion is that the first people who are saved based upon their faith are Joseph and Elizabeth, not Mary because her Salvation has already occurred.

[kawaii]

The First Ecumenical Council






Held in Nicea, Asia Minor in 325. Under Emperor Constantine the Great. 318 Bishops were present.
The Arian Controversy

Arius denied the divinity of Christ. If Jesus was born, then there was time when He did not exist. If He became God, then there was time when He was not. The Council declared Arius' teaching a heresy, unacceptable to the Church and decreed that Christ is God. He is of the same essence "homoousios" with God the Father.
The Creed

The first part of the seven articles of the Creed were ratified at the First Ecumenical Council. The text reads as follows:

"We believe in one God. The Father Almighty. Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of Light; true God of true God; begotten not made; of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man. And He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and he shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; whose Kingdom shall have no end."

Defenders of Orthodoxy

St. Athanasios the Great (297-373)

Fearless champion of Orthodoxy; spent sixteen of his forty-five years as Bishop of Alexandria in exile; one of the most profound theologians; Father of the Church.

St. Basil the Great (330-379)

A natural leader and organizer; spoke and wrote against Arianism; Founded hospitals, orphanages, welfare agencies; revised and updated the Divine Liturgy; made a great contribution to Monasticism (East and West); one of the famous Cappadocian Fathers (together with St. Gregory of Nyssa; his younger brother and St. Gregory of Nazianzus the Theologian; his close friend). The Cappadocians, along with St. Athanasius the Great, laid the pattern for formulating the doctrines related to the mystery of the Holy Trinity. St. Basil the Great, along with St. Gregory of Nazianzus (the Theologian) and St. John Chrysostom are called the Three Hieararchs.

The First Ecumenical Council
The Second Ecumenical Council
The Third Ecumenical Council
The Fourth Ecumenical Council
The Fifth Ecumenical Council
The Sixth Ecumenical Council
The Quinisext Ecumenical Council
The Seventh Ecumenical Council

[wagglebee]

YOPIOS

You could trademark that and put it on bumperstickers and t-shirts.

[nanetteclaret]

These books were written at the same time the Gospels and Epistles were written. They were circulated around among the Christians and were studied. There were also many others, "Shepherd of Hermas," "The Epistle of Clement" (fouth bishop of Rome and friend of St. Paul: “And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.” Philippians 4:3), and many others.

These books were considered for the Canon of Scripture but were rejected by the Council of Hippo (393), the First Council of Carthage (397), and the Second Council of Carthage (419), all by the influence of the Holy Spirit. These Councils are when the Canon of Scripture was codified. Previous to this time, there was no formal list of which books the Church considered to be the divinely inspired Word of God.

[adiaireton8]

How are you going to lead a bible study when you don't believe it???

We don't believe your heretical interpretation of it. But we definitely believe the Bible. We wrote it and put it together. Protestants got it from us, remember?

-A8

[Salvation]

Actually, I am not the author of it. Polycarp, a former poster is the brain behind that acromymn.

But it makes sense, doesn't it?

[xzins]

Give me the verse you're thinking of, because the one I'm thinking of does not teach that that written records did not exist.

Luke, on the other hands says:

1:1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, 1:2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, 1:3 it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; 1:4 so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.

Note how Peter acknowledges the writings of Paul as being among "all the rest of the Scriptures." Peter says:

2Pe 3:16 (Paul) as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

[wagglebee]

Doesn't it seem odd to you that folks that DO take God's Word literally couldn't possible join your church???

Unfortunately, the FACTS don't agree with you. What the Church is seeing more and more often is people (mainy of them ordained ministers) leaving Protestantism to be received into full Communion with the Church.

The people who fall away from the Church and succumb to false doctrine usually do so because they are uneducated about what Church dogma really is and they are fooled. Fortunately, many of them do return.

[xzins]

See #292.

"Compile an account..."

[kawaii]

2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

[Iscool]

"Scriptures" at the time this was writtten means the Old Testament. There were no New Testament "Scriptures" at the time Luke wrote Acts. That didn't happen until the late 300s.

You got the same problem other folks have...You don't believe what God wrote...

2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

It says traditions which you have been taught...NOT, will be taught...And surprise...Paul had been writing scripture all along...Says so right there in God's word, the bible...It's called epistles...

[blue-duncan]

John 20:31, "But these are written that you may[a] believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name"

[kawaii]

St Paul was not writing a 'guidebook of the faith' he wrote epistles to correct specific things. Most of scripture was ORAL, and the traditions he refers to were already being practiced as traditions of the church.

Archaeological evidence backs this up; the early Christians had icons, they celebrated the Eucharist and confessed it was the body and blood of Christ. That's why when Peter was arrested by the Romans Christians were being rounded up as CANNIBALS.

[nanetteclaret]

Again, I challenge you to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. We will then discuss whether the Catholic Church is Bible-believing.

Please look at these Scripture verses. Protestants DO NOT take these verses literally. The Catholic Church does:

Matthew 16:17-19
Luke 24:46-39
Matthew 28:18-20
John 20:21-23
6th Chapter of John
2 Thessalonians 2:5
Revelation 5:8
Revelation 8:3-4
Hebrews 12:1
Colossians 1:24

[Iscool]

And you are a proponent of your own personal interpretation of Scripture.

Unlike your church, I don't interpret the bible...I believe it as it's written...Try it sometime...