Posted on 12/12/2006 10:51:32 PM PST by 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 IXs 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 IXs 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.
Regarding the Book of Revelation, you clearly have me confused with a different poster.
Let's say millions.
How does St Y know about all of those?
(100) How do the saints hear us? They hear us as being one in the Holy Spirit with us - "that they may be one in us" (St. John XVII. 21), as members of the one Church of God, having for her head the one Christ, and animated by the one Spirit of God. The saints see and hear us in the Holy Spirit in the same manner as we see and hear with our bodily eyes and ears by means of light and air; but our bodily sight and hearing are very imperfect in comparison to spiritual sight and hearing. At a great distance we cannot see many objects and cannot hear many sounds, but spiritual sight and hearing are perfect; not a single movement of the heart, not a single thought, not a single word, intention, or desire escapes them, because the Spirit of God - in Whom the saints dwell, see, and hear us - is all perfect, omniscient, all-seeing, and all-hearing, for He is omni present.
http://prayerbook.riewe.com/saintjohn8.htm
The problem though, might still be in something else: OK, so we said that the saints hear our prayers. However we know that only God is present everywhere and only He knows our hearts. How come therefore the saints are informed of the prayers of all the Orthodox, who are scattered all over the world, since they are not present everywhere and do not know men's hearts?
We know from the Holy Writ that the saints in heaven receive knowledge of the pleasant or unpleasant events that take place on earth. The fact that we do not know how this is achieved (whether it is through angels, as we read in Revelation 8:4 -- "And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand" --, or through some other means that the Lord only knows) is no reason to deny it!
But where does the Bible mention that the saints in heaven become informed of the happenings on earth?
In many places. The Lord says explicitly in Luke 15:10: "Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth ". Also, in Revelation 6:10 it is mentioned that the souls that had been sacrificed for God's word and were in heaven would "And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Abraham told the rich man: "child, remember that you received your goods during your life and Lazarus the bad things". From this, it is evident that Abraham, while not present everywhere, had known of the specifics of the life the rich man and Lazarus had lived on earth. Also, Abraham tells the rich man regarding his (the rich man's) five brothers: "they have Moses and the prophets to listen to". Abraham died 2000 years BC, Moses with his Law arrived in 1500 BC and the prophets lived from 800 BC onwards. Here is how those in heaven are still informed of the things that happen on earth without being present everywhere. Also, in the 5th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, it is mentioned that Ananias and Sapphirra had decided in secret to say that they had sold their property for less money than they had actually received in payment. When Apostle Peter heard of this lie, he reproached them and they died. Was Apostle Peter present everywhere in order to know of their deceit? A deceit they had only discussed in secret, alone the two of them, away from everyone else?
http://www.eastern-orthodoxy.com/intercession.htm
How are the Saints able to hear our prayers?
The Omniscient and Almighty God, Who is present everywhere and knows of everything, is richly equipped of means with which He uncovers in the souls of his Saints, all that is happening in our tangible world, whether it be close or whether it be distant. With the use of our human and limited brain, we have found the means (telephone, wireless, satellites etc) to communicate with the other side of the world and to learn what is happening there, all in a matter of seconds. How then can the Saints, who are spirits, and have no material barriers to prevent them, and who are in direct communication with the Almighty God and the Divine Spirits, the Angels, have incomparable difficulties to learn of things'?
If we were to suppose the opposite that the souls of the Saints who are close to God, do not have the ability to learn of what is happening on earth since they are not present everywhere. This would be like accepting that even though they are close to God, they are in a much worse position than when they were on the earth where with their deteriorating human flesh they perceived supernatural revelations and had the gift of clear sightedness. Is this then not blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?
We do not know by which means the Virgin Mary and the Saints are informed of our prayers. What we do know with absolute certainty from the Word of God is that they pray for us and that their prayers reach God. Furthermore, the Orthodox Church teaches that all who are Christians (in the Militant Church), together with all the Saints (in the Triumphant Church), are joined to the Body of Christ (Eph 5:30). Each one of us, not just because we regard ourselves as Orthodox Christians, constitutes a living cell of the Body of Christ and consequently, one belongs to the other, and can and must express by every means this brotherly bond.
It is because of this tender brotherly bond of the Holy people that the population of an entire city is saved, (Joshua 11: 8-9). However, "charity never fails" (1 Cor 13:8), and it will not cease to exist. This tender bond of brotherly love binds us all, with all the Saints, with the entire Church.
One beautiful scene of the Revelation depicts the close connection of the Saints with the members of the Militant Church. In this scene, St John records, "I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held. And they cried with a loud voice, saying, how long O Lord, holy and true, do You not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given to every one of them; and it was said to them that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellow-servants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled" (Rev 6:9-11). This moving scene shows just how united the Saints are with us, and how much they participate "in our happiness and sorrow" as they mediate for us before the throne of God (also refer to Luke 15: 7).
This close bond of love is evident in the most sacred part of the Divine Liturgy, which says, "Especially for our most Holy Virgin Mary", and "Having commemorated all the Saints, again and again... Let us commend ourselves and one another and our whole life to Christ our Lord".
"Thus, since all the Saints have been commemorated at the end of the bloodless Sacrifice... in particular the most Holy Virgin Mary... let us entrust ourselves with whole-hearted confidence, let us entrust each other and the whole of our lives to Christ, our true God.
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~goawa/prayers.html
The saints hear us in the same way one soul hears another. And more than this: on earth the contact between people through the bodily organs of sense somewhat impedes and hinders the immediate communion of souls, but in the heavenly-earthly sphere this communion is free. In this sphere our voice, our words, reading and singing in the work of prayer are necessary for ourselves, for our sake, so as to unite two or three of us or a whole church into a single common soul, "That with a single heart we may hymn" God and His saints.
It is said of earthly relationships: "Tell me who your friends are, and I'll tell you who you are." "A man learns from the company he keeps"whether for good or ill. Is it not so also in the purely spiritual sphere? The Apostle John the Theologian instructs in his catholic epistle, which is for all Christians, including ourselves: "I write (the Gospel, the Epistles, the Apocalypse) that ye also may have fellowship with us, and truly, our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ" (I John 1:3). He writes this, being in great old age, giving us his testament that men live in common love. The chief of the Apostles writes: "I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance (to prepare yourselves for a free entrance into the eternal Kingdom of our Lord) ... knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shown me. Moreover I will endeavor that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance" (II Peter 1:13, 15).
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/pomaz_invisible.aspx
"Therefore...if it is not in the scriptures...it is not so."
By the way, this is a bogus conclusion from Acts 17:11.
It is the Jews examining the Old Testament and learning how it was fullfilled in the New Testament, to learn that it was true.
Do you suppose that the Books of the Bible were complete at the writing of Acts?
Thus, Acts 17:11 is NOT about Solo Scriptura!
"Therefore...if it is not in the scriptures...it is not so."
By the way, this is a bogus conclusion from Acts 17:11.
It is the Jews examining the Old Testament and learning how it was fullfilled in the New Testament, to learn that it was true.
Do you suppose that the Books of the Bible were complete at the writing of Acts?
Thus, Acts 17:11 is NOT about Solo Scriptura!
Only to the extent that it's consistent w Rome.
Bishops can't speak "excathedra", except to repeat it.
Thanks!
I've tried using the full Apollogetics in the past and determined it's better to just boil it down for them.
1. You can't just have everybody and anybody deciding what is real and what is not, and then reaching different conclussions as to the meaning!
2. They were talking about using the Old Testament to verify what had indeed come to pass. Not to conclude Solo Scriptura!
No.
Well, you got that wrong as well...You folks don't hold the word of God in very high regard...Not at all like the Bereans...The Bereans were searching the scripture because the scripture was the standard for all truth...They wanted to make sure Paul was on track...
And one thing is crystal clear...The Old Testament is 100% 'Sola Scripture'...Even where it says don't build statues of Mary and do NOT pray facing the east where the 'Sun God' of Constantine originates from every morning...
And the fact that your church deviates from the scripture in the New Testament means no more to you than when your church deviates from the Old Testament...
God authored both Testaments and those Testaments will judge you...
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
The knowledge contained in that book will slice apart your body and separate your vile flesh from your spirit...And you will be judged 'by what's written in THAT book...You'd better get it right...
You'll not be judged by any pope, or church or what ever strange doctrines they have come up with...You'll be judged by that book, ALONE...
God wrote the bible...Both Testaments...He didn't make any mistakes and He didn't leave anything out...
1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.
1Jo 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
You have the written RECORD...It's been recorded...It's done...
1Jo 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life: and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
1Jo 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
From God's mouth to your eyes (and ears)...
You can't understand it because God didn't create a Quadrinity...Mary doesn't fit into the equation...The Christian God has no mother...
The Trinity is no longer a mystery...It has been revealed in the 'word of God'...Believing it is the hard part for some of you folks...
-A8
(1) Does Jesus have a mother?
(2) Is Jesus God?
Thanks.
-A8
You put yourself into the same trap you are trying to snare everyone else with...When the bible says no private interpretation allowed, that includes your popes and church as well...
Honestly, I would like you to tell me - how do you know YOUR opinion is correct???
I realize this wasn't addressed to me but I will tell you anyway...
The key to understanding the bible is believing it...Don't add to it...Don't take away from it...Don't interpret it...Just believe it...Divide it and get the divisions right...And you do that believing it and not adding or removing anything...
Praying for all those who has misunderstood Catholic dogma. May they strive to be accepting of Catholic beliefs and look at Catholics as fellow Christians. In the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.
Where does it say that?
Don't interpret it...Just believe it...
Do you "interpret" or "just believe" the following verse? "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves." (John 6:53)
-A8
"but true Saints are only [to be found] in Orthodoxy.
Everything written in between these 2 statements is a waste of perfectly good ink...
I hope Campion will forgive me for responding here.
The idea here is that Jesus IS fully God and fully man; but He is one Person (one Being, one Essence) and not two; and the kind of Person He is, is a divine Person; thus a divine Being.
He is also fully man: a divine person, a divine being, with a human nature.
I'm using some specialized, precise definitions here, of "person," "being," "essence" and "nature," which sometimes makes people (like me) feel like tearing out their hair, but it ends up being important because otherwise you end up with Jesus = 2 "beings," and that ain't right.
If I am 18 months old or I have an I.Q. of 50 or I'm hallucinating and I think you're an axe murderer, and I shoot you dead, killing is still intrinsically evil and murder is still a sin, but I am not fully morally guilty because I haven't sufficient intellect or will to be held entirely responsible.
That's why we can say that some acts are always intrinsically wrong, but only God can be the ultimate judge of individual guilt.
As for the jihadi suicide bomber: all I can say is that when God, who sees the heart and knows all things, and can neither deceive nor be deceived, makes His judgment at the end of time, all of us, whether saved or damned, will acknowledge that His judgment is absolutely perfect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.