[Catholic Caucus] Vade retro me, satana! - Modernism makes all things repugnant

The new guardian of Catholic "orthodoxy", the semper-heretical "National Catholic Reporter", calls us out for "hypocrisy" for our support for the "Filial Correction".

The charge is related to our post from 2012 in which, during the height of the intense persecution of Pope Benedict XVI -- persecution by the media, by many churchmen, by that self-entitled "Mafia" who wanted Joseph Ratzinger gone (and succeeded in it) and used dirty hands inside the Vatican to leak information to the media unceasingly -- we asked for unity and respect for the Pope using the words of Pope Saint Pius X during his life-or-death struggle against Modernism. "Love the Pope," Saint Pius X urged, as rebellious infiltrators did all they could to stifle the effects of Pascendi in the Pope's efforts to "instaurare omnia in Christo."

We know that Saint Pius X succeeded only partially in expelling the vipers and snakes of Modernism from the dens in which they were crawling. The Church had a half-century of internal peace, but Pius XII already knew that the struggle was coming to an epochal apex when he did all he could to beatify and canonize Pope Sarto in rapid succession. With Vatican II, the gates opened, and the infiltrated Modernists marched on, in order to occupy all spaces that had been denied to them in the previous decades.

Liberalism makes all things repugnant, including in the Church, as we have witnessed abundantly in the past half-century. From music and the visual arts to theology and philosophy, Modernists spared no time, as soon as the Council convened, to destroy and subvert all that was beautiful and good in the Church. "The smoke of Satan," as Paul VI himself realized, entered into every corner of the sanctuary, and intoxicated the souls of the Catholics who remained -- the majority don't even bother to practice the Faith. But at least the Church remained a bastion of Morality and defense of the family for a few decades more.

Alas, even that is fast eroding now. As Saint Pius X himself had prophesied in Pascendi, exactly 110 years ago, in a passage about what Modernists want the Church to become that practically seems to describe the current state of the great majority in the hierarchy, including up to the very top:

The ecclesiastical authority must change its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political and social organization, it must adapt itself to those which exist in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, both in the estimation in which they must be held and in the exercise of them. The clergy are asked to return to their ancient lowliness and poverty, and in their ideas and action to be guided by the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, echoing the teaching of their Protestant masters, would like the suppression of ecclesiastical celibacy.

Words are not lost in space and time: context is essential. And the context of the call of Pope Saint Pius X to utmost obedience was precisely in his struggle against Modernism, against the very infiltrators who were decided to derail his (and the Church's permanent) horror for heresy. The very infiltrators who now wish to set the terms of debate because they have the power. The very infiltrators who are so sullen in their perfidy that they do not mind soiling the most precious thing on this earth, the Blessed Sacrament, by ignoring Jesus Christ's own words about what constitutes the mortal and permanent sin of adultery.

They stop at nothing: if they do not mind distorting the words of the Lord Himself, if they did all they could to undermine the pontificate of Benedict XVI, what are a few words from Saint Pius X from over one hundred years ago? We love the Pope, including the current one, and that is why we pray for him to fulfill his vocation of confirming his brethren in the unchangeable and unchanging Apostolic Faith handed down from Our Lord to Saint Peter and the other Apostles while He was personally present here on Earth, a Faith kept immaculate and pure down through the centuries.

"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil!" Vade retro me, satana!

______________________

P.S. Incidentally, it is indeed quite excellent to see that the influence of this little corner of the virtual world has become perceptible enough that the English-language newspaper of record of the current Pontificate would waste any time trying to discredit us. It means we have bothered the Liberal Establishment currently in charge of the hierarchy. Please, pray for us and for our protection!

The Oath Against Modernism

Pope Pius X - September 1, 1910

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

To 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 Rom. 1:19), 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. . .