Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

SACRORUM ANTISTITUM ~ OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

( NOTE : On July 3, 1907, Saint Pius X issued a decree called Lamentabili Sane, listing and condemning the errors of the Modernists. Two months later in that same year, on September 8th, he issued an Encyclical Called Pascendi Dominici Gregis, a more lengthy explanatory discussion and condemnation of the heresy of Modernism. (3) Three years later, on September 1, 1910, he issued the below included motu proprio entitled Sacrorum Antistitum in which he mandated that an Oath Against Modernism, the text of which was prescribed in the motu proprio, be taken by all Catholic clergy before being ordained to the subdiaconate.

That mandate was not rescinded until 1967, (4) and this is the important point. The requirement that all Catholic seminarians who were being ordained to the subdiaconate on their way to the priesthood take the Oath Against Modernism was not rescinded until more than one year after the closing of Vatican II. (5) Every Catholic priest ordained between the years 1910 and 1967 was obliged to take the Oath Against Modernism.

The implications are startling. Every single bishop, Archbishop, and Cardinal who participated in Vatican II and every single Vatican II perimus ( expert advisor ) who was also a priest, without exception, had taken the Oath Against Modernism mandated for all Catholic clergy by Pope Saint Pius X in 1910 and not rescinded by the Vatican until 1967. To use a portion of the words of the oath, every single participant in Vatican II was under an oath-bound obligation to God Almighty "with due reverence [to] submit and adhere with [his] whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili". )

Soon we will observe the 100th Anniversary of Pope Saint Pius X's landmark mandatory Oath Against Modernism that should convince the sedevacantist position of Fr. Joseph Ratzinger who gravely violated his Sacred Oath and abdicated any authority long before he was elected by the conciliar conclave, just as his conciliar predecessors Angelo Roncalli, Giovanni Montini, Luciani Albino and Karol Wojtyla also deviated from the faith in violating their vow to God, when they took this very Oath. Montini especially incurred the wrath of Almighty God and the Blessed Apostles Saints Peter and Paul when he negated both the Oath Against Modernism as well as the Prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel, thus opening the door wide for satan to slither in and lay a nest of vipers that now own the Vatican lock and stock and snakepit. 60 years ago on August 12 His Holiness Pope Pius XII also tried to stave off the onrushing Modernist rebellion by issuing his encyclical Humani Generis warning the faithful of the false opinions and errors threatening to undermine Holy Dogma. We can see how those in charge today totally ignored his sage words and furiously forged ahead with their unholy and very dangerous agendas.

Humani Generis declares the oath must be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Romans 1:90 ), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and Lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God.


24 posted on 12/05/2010 7:51:30 PM PST by Robert Drobot (Qui tacet consentit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


Compare...
Traditional Latin Mass

Atmosphere of Reverent Worship :
Peaceful, otherworldly atmosphere. Emphasis on individual 'lifting his heart & mind to God.' The faithful direct their prayer and attention to God, not each other."

Profound Reverence for His Real Presence :
Sixteen genuflections. The hands of the priest alone touch the consecrated host. Communion given only on tongue.

Fidelity to Catholic Doctrine :
Over the course of a year, all facets of Roman Rite Catholicism are presented.

Antiquity :
Bulk of Sunday prayers & their arrangement goes back at least to 300s and 400s AD. Canon essentially the same since Blessed Saint Ambrose ( Anno Dómini 397 ).

Stability :
Everything regulated by precise tradition to protect the purity of worship and doctrine.

Priest is Sacrificer:
Priest faces tabernacle, cross and altar ( symbolically toward God ). Priest performs all the actions & recites all the prayers of the Mass.

  

Wit....
Modern Mass at your parish

Social, Classroom, Entertainment Atmosphere :
Constant standing, sitting, amplified noise; atmosphere like a public meeting. Emphasis on 'instruction.' Socializing in church before & after service, and handshaking during.

Indifference, Irreverence towards Real Presence :
Only three genuflections required. Lay men & women distribute communion. Communion given in hand - a practice protestants introduced to deny Christ's Real Presence.

Systematic Omission of Catholic Doctrines :
New and or 'revised' prayers systematically omit all references to hell; judgment; punishment for sin; merits of the Saints; the One True Church; the souls of the departed; and heavenly miracles.

Novelty :
Traditional Sunday prayers omitted, or stripped of doctrines, and 'rearranged' from the 1960s to this day. Only 17% of old prayers remain. Chunks of ancient Canon are now 'optional'. The words of consecration, Christ's own words "For you and for many" have been changed. Three substitute 'Canons' invented & introduced in 1960s, with more invented later.

Constant Change :
Options, options and more options. Individual priests & parish liturgy committees get to pick, drop or invent texts to push whatever they think the faithful should believe.

Priest is "President", Actor :
Priest faces people instead of symbolically "toward God." Priest sits off to side. His functions given away to lay men and women whose hands have not been consecrated to hold the precious Body of Christ Jesus, nor have they been given the Holy Sacrament of Holy Orders to perform priestly duties.

©2007 traditionalmass.org.


25 posted on 12/05/2010 7:53:39 PM PST by Robert Drobot (Qui tacet consentit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson