Before reading the actual Encyclical “Syllabus of Errors” (immediately following), this Wikipedia article presents well the historical setting before and after it was issued in 1864, and mind sets of those Catholics praising or non-Catholics condemning this. Remember that the 80 issues listed in the Syllabus Encyclical is a summary of those issues which had already been formally condemned by the Church in earlier documents wherein these condemned evils are fully explained.  The apologetics of those previous documents should also be read to strengthen one’s knowledge, enhancing the ability to defend the true Catholic faith in these endtimes. With knowledge of these 80 condemned issues, readers of the heretical Sixteen Documents of the Second Vatican Council (V2: October 13, 1962-December 8,65) and numerous subsequent changes to doctrine and liturgies “in the spirit of Vatican II,” will see the obvious and indisputable parallel with the Syllabus of Errors.  For nearly every heresy listed in the Syllabus has become embraced, taught, promulgated, practiced, and or condoned by the V2 Counterfeit-Catholic Novus Ordo Contra-Church that emerged from the apostatized hierarchy of the once-Catholic Vatican. Talmudic Judaic-founded & controlled Freemasonry and Communism had achieve usurpation of the Chair of Peter via a coup d’etat in the October 26, 1958 Papal Conclave that overthrew the supposed election of Cardinal Siri of Genoa (he chose the name Pope Gregory XVII.)   All the Cardinals in attendance were complicit with this rejecting of Siri, and thus committed schism by which they all immediately incurred ipso facto excommunication. Out of the Mystical Body of Christ, having no title, office, power, or benefice, these once-Catholic men two days later on October 28 illicitly gave the world Freemason Angelo Roncalli as Antipope John XXIII (the second antipope with that name in history; the first being Antipope John XXIII of Pisa, 1410-1415, during the Great Western Schism, a time when three men from 1409-1415 were simultaneously claiming the papacy.) From that pinnacle of power, their machinations succeeded in 1962 beginning worldwide the visible destruction of true Catholic religion founded by Christ.  For in April 1962 Freemason Antipope John XXIII suppressed the true Roman Missal of Pius V Mass was globally, replacing it with the QUO PRIMUM-condemned “1962 Latin Tridentine Mass a/k/a “John XXIII Mass.”  the highest form of adoration to the Holy Trinity ceased in all churches controlled by the Vatican. For the clergy who were well aware of that Quo Primum Papal Bull (1570, Pope St. Pius V,) because it was prominently at the beginning of their altar missals, this was a test of their faith. All but a few failed, and remained on the Church’s payroll by foisting an invalid Mass that excommunicates automatically all who participate.  A culpably ignorant laity who attended this condemn “Mass” of Antipope John XXIII were also incurred ipso facto excommunication by Quo Primum.  It is every Catholic’s obligation to known and obey such critical Church teachings. Choosing to distract and delude themselves with worldly pursuits, and, the over 600,000 once-Catholic membership in April 1962 was now, with so few exceptions, excommunicated and living outside the bosom and unity of the true Catholic Church.  Over six decades later, they still hold the buildings, but not the true Catholic Mass or faith.  The indestructible true Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ continued to exist infallible, immutable, and maintained by the faithful …in a state of eclipsed exile.  For all the decades since 1962, there are now over 1.3 billion apostates still holding control of all once-Catholic churches and institutions.  They call themselves “Catholic” because they have the buildings, but they have not the true Catholic faith.  Nor have they the doctrinal orthodoxy as taught by Christ and the Apostles and Fathers of the Church and past true Popes, doctrines, nor valid Sacraments.  Sadly, when admonished of their errors, they care not to change and obey those truths. Most are indifferent.  Many frequent V2 Counterfeit-Catholic Novus Ordo churches more as loci for social contacts, schools for their children, or seek temporal welfare assistance. Were they shown the issues in the Syllabus of Errors, and without being told those issues are formally condemned by true pope in past centuries, they would recognize them as the “truths” they accept as taught by their present day V2 Novus Ordo “Catholic” church.

The Great Apostasy became manifest 57 years ago in 1962, and is ongoing.  Although the once-Catholic Vatican and all its affiliated churches have morphed into a virtual One Wold Religion in preparation to accept the ultimate Antichrist.  But the true Catholic documents condemning the V2, etc. heresies as listed in the Syllabus of Errors, remain unchanged and are important to know for all these seeking salvation and wanting to avoid being deceived.

Syllabus of Errors

Source: Wikipedia

Pope Pius IX  (ed.,L.  Pio Nono)

The Syllabus of Errors (Latin: Syllabus Errorum) is a document issued by the Holy See under Pope Pius IX on December 8, 1864, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, as an annex to the Quanta cura encyclical.[1] It condemns a total of 80 errors or heresies, and through that promulgated Catholic Church teaching on a number of philosophical and political questions, and referred to documents issued previously.

Reaction amongst Catholics was mixed, while that coming from Protestants was uniformly negative. It remains a controversial document, and has been cited on numerous occasions by both Catholic traditionalists seeking to uphold traditional Catholic values and anti-Catholics seeking to criticize the church’s positions.[citation needed]

The purpose of the syllabus was not to explain in depth the errors themselves, but only provide a list of them with a short paraphrasing of the error and references to the corresponding papal documents. The actual encyclicals listed reveal what it is about the error that is incorrect, and in which situations or nuances or emphasis. In order to understand the Pope’s argument against each error, one must read not only the error itself, but the document it points to.

History

On December 8, 1864, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception the Holy See under Pope Pius IX issued the Syllabus of Errors, which is a compilation of what the church believed were heresies in the philosophical and political realm. It listed them, and referred to older Catholic Church documents on these matters issued previously.[citation needed]

Format

The Syllabus is made up of phrases and paraphrases from earlier papal documents, along with index references to them, and presents them as a list of “condemned propositions”. For instance, in condemning proposition 14, “Philosophy is to be treated without taking any account of supernatural revelation”, the Syllabus asserts the truth of the contrary proposition—that philosophy should take account of supernatural revelation. The Syllabus does not explain why each particular proposition is wrong, but cites earlier documents for similar or identical statements. Except for some propositions drawn from Pius’ encyclical Qui pluribus of November 9, 1846, most were based on documents after the Revolutions of 1848 shocked the Pope and the papacy. (see Italian unification).

The Syllabus is divided into ten sections which condemn as false various statements about the following topics: “Errors about…

1. pantheism, naturalism, and absolute rationalism, Propositions 1–7;
2. moderate rationalism, Propositions 8–14;
3. indifferentism and latitudinarianism, Propositions 15–18;
4. socialism, communism, secret societies, Bible societies, and liberal clerical societies, a general condemnation, unnumbered;
5. the Catholic Church and her rights, Propositions 19–38 (defending temporal power in the Papal States, which were overthrown six years later);
6. civil society and its relationship to the church, Propositions 39–55;
7. natural and Christian ethics, Propositions 56–64;
8. Christian marriage, Propositions 65–74;
9. the civil power of the sovereign Pontiff in the Papal States, Propositions 75–76 and
10. liberalism in every political form, Propositions 77–80.

Selected example statements

Statements the encyclical condemn as false include the following examples:

• “Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil.” (No. 3, rationalism)
• “All the truths of religion proceed from the innate strength of human reason; hence reason is the ultimate standard by which man can and ought to arrive at the knowledge of all truths of every kind.” (No. 4, rationalism)
• “Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church.” (No. 18).
• “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.” (No. 55, separation of church and state)
• “In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.” (No. 77)
• “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true.” (No. 15) and that “It has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship.” (No. 78, freedom of religion)
• “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with, progress, liberalism and modern civilization.” (No. 80, cf. Jamdudum cernimus)

Reactions

Non-Catholics

Within the Protestant world, reactions were uniformly negative. In 1874 the British Leader of the Opposition William Ewart Gladstone published a tract entitled The Vatican Decrees in their bearing on Civil Allegiance: A Political Expostulation, in which he said that after the Syllabus:

. . . no one can now become (Rome’s) convert without renouncing his moral and mental freedom, and placing his civil loyalty and duty at the mercy of another.

The government of France briefly tried to suppress the circulation of the encyclical and the Syllabus within its borders; it forbade priests to explain the Syllabus from the pulpit, though newspapers were allowed to discuss it from a secular point of view.

Catholics

The document met with a mixed reception among Catholics; many accepted it wholeheartedly, others wanted a clarification of some points, and still others were as shocked as their Protestant neighbors by the apparent broad scope of the condemnations.

Catholic apologists such as Félix Dupanloup and John Henry Newman said that the Syllabus was widely misinterpreted by readers who did not have access to or did not bother to check the original documents of which it was a summary. The propositions listed had been condemned as erroneous opinions in the sense and context in which they originally occurred; without the original context, the document appeared to condemn a larger range of ideas than it actually did. Thus it was asserted that no critical response to the Syllabus which did not take the cited documents and their context into account could be valid. Newman writes:

The Syllabus then has no dogmatic force; it addresses us, not in its separate portions, but as a whole, and is to be received from the Pope by an act of obedience, not of faith, that obedience being shown by having recourse to the original and authoritative documents, (Allocutions and the like,) to which the Syllabus pointedly refers. Moreover, when we turn to those documents, which are authoritative, we find the Syllabus cannot even be called an echo of the Apostolic Voice; for, in matters in which wording is so important, it is not an exact transcript of the words of the Pope, in its account of the errors condemned, just as would be natural in what is an index for reference.[2]

In the wake of the controversy following the document’s release, Pius IX referred to it as “raw meat needing to be cooked.” However, others within the church who supported the syllabus disagreed that there was any misinterpretation of the condemnations.[citation needed] The syllabus was an attack on liberalism, modernism, moral relativism, secularization, and the political emancipation of Europe from the tradition of Catholic Monarchies.[3]

Sources cited

The Syllabus cites a number of previous documents that had been written during Pius’s papacy. These include : Qui pluribus, Maxima quidem, Singulari quadam, Tuas libenter, Multiplices inter, Quanto conficiamur, Noscitis, Nostis et nobiscum, Meminit unusquisque, Ad Apostolicae, Nunquam fore, Incredibili, Acerbissimum, Singularis nobisque, Multis gravibusque, Quibus quantisque, Quibus luctuosissimis, In consistoriali, Cum non sine, Cum saepe, Quanto conficiamur, Jamdudum cernimus, Novos et ante, Quibusque vestrum and Cum catholica.

Examples

The English Catholic historian E. E. Y. Hales argued,”[T]he Pope is not concerned with a universal principle, but with the position in a particular state at a particular date. He is expressing his “wonder and distress” (no more) that in a Catholic country (Spain) it should be proposed to disestablish the Church and to place any and every religion upon a precisely equal footing. … Disestablishment and toleration were far from the normal practice of the day, whether in Protestant or in Catholic states.”[4] Newman points out that this particular item (#77) refers to the July 26, 1855 allocution Nemo vestrum. Relations between Spain and the Holy See were governed by a Concordat negotiated in 1851 (although not implemented until 1855),[5] which treaty Spain was then violating.[6]

Subsequent history

In the 21 November 1873 encyclical, Etsi multa (“On the Church in Italy, Germany, and Switzerland”), which is often appended to the Syllabus. Pius expresses further thoughts in the same vein condemning contemporary liberalizing anti-clerical legislation in South America as “a ferocious war on the Church.”

In 1907, Lamentabili sane exitu was promulgated, a “Syllabus condemning the errors of the Modernists”, being a list of errors that might be made by scholars engaged in biblical criticism.[7]

Footnotes

• Pius PP. IX. Quanta cura. Romae, 1864. link.
• Francis A. Sullivan, Creative Fidelity, ISBN0-8091-3644-9, p. 143.
• “The Syllabus of Pius IX”. New Advent. Kevin Knight, dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Retrieved December 19, 2016.
• Hales, E.E.Y. (1958). THE CATHOLIC CHURCH in the MODERN WORLD: A Survey from the French Revolution to the Present. Doubleday.
• Kelly, Leo, and Benedetto Ojetti. “Concordat.” The Catholic Encyclopedia 4. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908. 10 January 2019 This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.]
• Shaw, Russell. “Syllabus of Errors still relevant 150 years later”, OSV Weekly, November 25, 2014
• Lamentabili Sane text 1907

The Syllabus Of Errors

(Syllabus Eorroum)

Pope Pius IX – 1864

 

1. PANTHEISM, NATURALISM AND ABSOLUTE RATIONALISM

 

1. There exists no Supreme, all-wise, all-provident Divine Being, distinct from the universe, and God is identical with the nature of things, and is, therefore, subject to changes. In effect, God is produced in man and in the world, and all things are God and have the very substance of God, and God is one and the same thing with the world, and, therefore, spirit with matter, necessity with liberty, good with evil, justice with injustice. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.

 

2. All action of God upon man and the world is to be denied. — Ibid.

 

3. 3. Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil; it is law to itself, and suffices, by its natural force, to secure the welfare of men and of nations. — Ibid.

 

4. All the truths of religion proceed from the innate strength of human reason; hence reason is the ultimate standard by which man can and ought to arrive at the knowledge of all truths of every kind. — Ibid. and Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846, etc

 

5. 5. Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason. —

 

6. 6. The faith of Christ is in opposition to human reason and divine revelation not only is not useful, but is even hurtful to the perfection of man. — Ibid.
7. 7. The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth.

 

1. MODERATE RATIONALISM

 

8. As human reason is placed on a level with religion itself, so theological must be treated in the same manner as philosophical sciences. — Allocution “Singulari quadam,” Dec. 9, 1854.

 

9. 9. All the dogmas of the Christian religion are indiscriminately the object of natural science or philosophy, and human reason, enlightened solely in an historical way, is able, by its own natural strength and principles, to attain to the true science of even the most abstruse dogmas; provided only that such dogmas be proposed to reason itself as its object. — Letters to the Archbishop of Munich, “Gravissimas inter,” Dec. 11, 1862, and “Tuas libenter,” Dec. 21, 1863.

 

10. As the philosopher is one thing, and philosophy another, so it is the right and duty of the philosopher to subject himself to the authority which he shall have proved to be true; but philosophy neither can nor ought to submit to any such authority. — Ibid., Dec. 11, 1862.

 

11. 11. The Church not only ought never to pass judgment on philosophy, but ought to tolerate the errors of philosophy, leaving it to correct itself. —, Dec. 21, 1863.

 

12. The decrees of the Apostolic See and of the Roman congregations impede the true progress of science. — Ibid.

 

13. The method and principles by which the old scholastic doctors cultivated theology are no longer suitable to the demands of our times and to the progress of the sciences. — Ibid.

 

14. Philosophy is to be treated without taking any account of supernatural revelation. — Ibid.

 

III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITUDINARIANISM

 

15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.
16. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. — Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846.

 

17. 17. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. — Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863, etc.

 

18. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. — Encyclical “Noscitis,” Dec. 8, 1849.

 

1. SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, SECRET SOCIETIES,

BIBLICAL SOCIETIES, CLERICO-LIBERAL SOCIETIES

 

Pests of this kind are frequently reprobated in the severest terms in the Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846, Allocution “Quibus quantisque,” April 20, 1849, Encyclical “Noscitis et nobiscum,” Dec. 8, 1849, Allocution “Singulari quadam,” Dec. 9, 1854, Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863.

 

1. ERRORS CONCERNING THE CHURCH AND HER RIGHTS

 

19. 19. The Church is not a true and perfect society, entirely free- nor is she endowed with proper and perpetual rights of her own, conferred upon her by her Divine Founder; but it appertains to the civil power to define what are the rights of the Church, and the limits within which she may exercise those rights. — Allocution “Singulari quadam, & quuot; Dec. 9, 1854, etc.

 

20. 20. The ecclesiastical power ought not to exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government. — Allocution “Meminit unusquisque,” Sept. 30, 1861.

 

21. 21. The Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion. — Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.

 

22. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and authors are strictly bound is confined to those things only which are proposed to universal belief as dogmas of faith by the infallible judgment of the Church. — Letter to the Archbishop of Munich, “Tuas libenter,” Dec. 21, 1863.

 

23. 23. Roman pontiffs and ecumenical councils have wandered outside the limits of their powers, have usurped the rights of princes, and have even erred in defining matters of faith and morals. — Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.

 

24. 24. The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect. — Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.

 

25. 25. Besides the power inherent in the episcopate, other temporal power has been attributed to it by the civil authority granted either explicitly or tacitly, which on that account is revocable by the civil authority whenever it thinks fit. — Ibid.
26. The Church has no innate and legitimate right of acquiring and possessing property. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856; Encyclical “Incredibili,” Sept. 7, 1863.

 

27. The sacred ministers of the Church and the Roman pontiff are to be absolutely excluded from every charge and dominion over temporal affairs. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.

 

28. 28. It is not lawful for bishops to publish even letters Apostolic without the permission of Government. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.

 

29. Favours granted by the Roman pontiff ought to be considered null, unless they have been sought for through the civil government. — Ibid.

 

30. The immunity of the Church and of ecclesiastical persons derived its origin from civil law. — Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.

 

31. 31. The ecclesiastical forum or tribunal for the temporal causes, whether civil or criminal, of clerics, ought by all means to be abolished, even without consulting and against the protest of the Holy See. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856; Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.

 

32. 32. The personal immunity by which clerics are exonerated from military conscription and service in the army may be abolished without violation either of natural right or equity. Its abolition is called for by civil progress, especially in a society framed on the model of a liberal government. — Letter to the Bishop of Monreale “Singularis nobisque,” Sept. 29, 1864.

 

33. It does not appertain exclusively to the power of ecclesiastical jurisdiction by right, proper and innate, to direct the teaching of theological questions. — Letter to the Archbishop of Munich, “Tuas libenter,” Dec. 21, 1863.

 

34. The teaching of those who compare the Sovereign Pontiff to a prince, free and acting in the universal Church, is a doctrine which prevailed in the Middle Ages. — Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.

 

35. There is nothing to prevent the decree of a general council, or the act of all peoples, from transferring the supreme pontificate from the bishop and city of Rome to another bishop and another city. — Ibid.

 

36. The definition of a national council does not admit of any subsequent discussion, and the civil authority car assume this principle as the basis of its acts. — Ibid.

 

37. 37. National churches, withdrawn from the authority of the Roman pontiff and altogether separated, can be established. — Allocution “Multis gravibusque,” Dec. 17, 1860.

 

38. The Roman pontiffs have, by their too arbitrary conduct, contributed to the division of the Church into Eastern and Western. — Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.

 

1. ERRORS ABOUT CIVIL SOCIETY,

CONSIDERED BOTH IN ITSELF

AND IN ITS RELATION TO THE CHURCH

 

39. The State, as being the origin and source of all rights, is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.

 

40. The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well- being and interests of society. — Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846; Allocution “Quibus quantisque,” April 20, 1849.

 

41. The civil government, even when in the hands of an infidel sovereign, has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs. It therefore possesses not only the right called that of “exsequatur,” but also that of appeal, called “appellatio ab abusu.” — Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851

 

42. In the case of conflicting laws enacted by the two powers, the civil law prevails. — Ibid.

 

43. The secular Dower has authority to rescind, declare and render null, solemn conventions, commonly called concordats, entered into with the Apostolic See, regarding the use of rights appertaining to ecclesiastical immunity, without the consent of the Apostolic See, and even in spite of its protest. — Allocution “Multis gravibusque,” Dec. 17, 1860; Allocution “In consistoriali,” Nov. 1, 1850.

 

44. The civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government: hence, it can pass judgment on the instructions issued for the guidance of consciences, conformably with their mission, by the pastors of the Church. Further, it has the right to make enactments regarding the administration of the divine sacraments, and the dispositions necessary for receiving them. — Allocutions “In consistoriali,” Nov. 1, 1850, and “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.

 

45. 45. The entire government of public schools in which the youth- of a Christian state is educated, except (to a certain extent) in the case of episcopal seminaries, may and ought to appertain to the civil power, and belong to it so far that no other authority whatsoever shall be recognized as having any right to interfere in the discipline of the schools, the arrangement of the studies, the conferring of degrees, in the choice or approval of the teachers. — Allocutions “Quibus luctuosissimmis,” Sept. 5, 1851, and “In consistoriali,” Nov. 1, 1850.

 

46. Moreover, even in ecclesiastical seminaries, the method of studies to be adopted is subject to the civil authority. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.

 

47. 47. The best theory of civil society requires that popular schools open to children of every class of the people, and, generally, all public institutes intended for instruction in letters and philosophical sciences and for carrying on the education of youth, should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority, control and interference, and should be fully subjected to the civil and political power at the pleasure of the rulers, and according to the standard of the prevalent opinions of the age. — Epistle to the Archbishop of Freiburg, “Cum non sine,” July 14, 1864.

 

48. Catholics may approve of the system of educating youth unconnected with Catholic faith and the power of the Church, and which regards the knowledge of merely natural things, and only, or at least primarily, the ends of earthly social life. — Ibid.

 

49. The civil power may prevent the prelates of the Church and the faithful from communicating freely and mutually with the Roman pontiff. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.

 

50. Lay authority possesses of itself the right of presenting bishops, and may require of them to undertake the administration of the diocese before they receive canonical institution, and the Letters Apostolic from the Holy See. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.

 

51. And, further, the lay government has the right of deposing bishops from their pastoral functions, and is not bound to obey the Roman pontiff in those things which relate to the institution of bishoprics and the appointment of bishops. — Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852, Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.

 

52. Government can, by its own right, alter the age prescribed by the Church for the religious profession of women and men; and may require of all religious orders to admit no person to take solemn vows without its permission. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.

 

53. The laws enacted for the protection of religious orders and regarding their rights and duties ought to be abolished; nay, more, civil Government may lend its assistance to all who desire to renounce the obligation which they have undertaken of a religious life, and to break their vows. Government may also suppress the said religious orders, as likewise collegiate churches and simple benefices, even those of advowson and subject their property and revenues to the administration and pleasure of the civil power. — Allocutions “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852; “Probe memineritis,” Jan. 22, 1855; “Cum saepe,” July 26, 1855.

 

54. 54. Kings and princes are not only exempt from the jurisdiction of the Church, but are superior to the Church in deciding questions of jurisdiction. — Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.

 

55. 55. The Church ought to be separated from the .State, and the State from the Church. — Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.

 

VII. ERRORS CONCERNING NATURAL AND CHRISTIAN ETHICS

 

56. 56. Moral laws do not stand in need of the divine sanction, and it is not at all necessary that human laws should be made conformable to the laws of nature and receive their power of binding from God. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.

 

57. 57. The science of philosophical things and morals and also civil laws may and ought to keep aloof from divine and ecclesiastical authority. —

 

58. No other forces are to be recognized except those which reside in matter, and all the rectitude and excellence of morality ought to be placed in the accumulation and increase of riches by every possible means, and the gratification of pleasure. — Ibid.; Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863.

 

59. Right consists in the material fact. All human duties are an empty word, and all human facts have the force of right. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.

 

60. Authority is nothing else but numbers and the sum total of material forces. — Ibid.

 

61. The injustice of an act when successful inflicts no injury on the sanctity of right. — Allocution “Jamdudum cernimus,” [ed., Iamdudum in original; no “J” in Classic Latin] March 18, 1861.

 

62. The principle of non-intervention, as it is called, ought to be proclaimed and observed. — Allocution “Novos et ante,” Sept. 28, 1860.

 

 

63. It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate princes, and even to rebel against them. — Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1864; Allocution “Quibusque vestrum,” Oct. 4, 1847; “Noscitis et Nobiscum,” Dec. 8, 1849; Apostolic Letter “Cum Catholica.”

 

64. 64. The violation of any solemn oath, as well as any wicked and flagitious action repugnant to the eternal law, is not only not blamable but is altogether lawful and worthy of the highest praise when done through love of country. — Allocution “Quibus quantisque,” April 20, 1849.

 

VIII. ERRORS CONCERNING CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE

 

65. The doctrine that Christ has raised marriage to the dignity of a sacrament cannot be at all tolerated. — Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.

 

66. 66. The Sacrament of Marriage is only a something accessory to the contract and separate from it, and the sacrament itself consists in the nuptial benediction alone. —

 

67. 67. By the law of nature, the marriage tie is not indissoluble, and in many cases divorce properly so called may be decreed by the civil authority. — Ibid.; Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.

 

68. The Church has not the power of establishing diriment impediments of marriage, but such a power belongs to the civil authority by which existing impediments are to be removed. — Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.

 

69. In the dark ages the Church began to establish diriment impediments, not by her own right, but by using a power borrowed from the State. — Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.

 

70. The canons of the Council of Trent, which anathematize those who dare to deny to the Church the right of establishing diriment impediments, either are not dogmatic or must be understood as referring to such borrowed power. — Ibid.

 

71. The form of solemnizing marriage prescribed by the Council of Trent, under pain of nullity, does not bind in cases where the civil law lays down another form, and declares that when this new form is used the marriage shall be valid.
72. Boniface VIII was the first who declared that the vow of chastity taken at ordination renders marriage void. — Ibid.

 

73. In force of a merely civil contract there may exist between Christians a real marriage, and it is false to say either that the marriage contract between Christians is always a sacrament, or that there is no contract if the sacrament be excluded. — Ibid.; Letter to the King of Sardinia, Sept. 9, 1852; Allocutions “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852, “Multis gravibusque,” Dec. 17, 1860.

 

74. Matrimonial causes and espousals belong by their nature to civil tribunals. — Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9 1846; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851, “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851; Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.

 

1. ERRORS REGARDING THE CIVIL POWER

OF THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF

 

75. The children of the Christian and Catholic Church are divided amongst themselves about the compatibility of the temporal with the spiritual power. — “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.

 

76. 76. The abolition of the temporal power of which the Apostolic See is possessed would contribute in the greatest degree to the liberty and prosperity of the Church. — Allocutions “Quibus quantisque,” April 20, 1849, “Si semper antea,” May 20, 1850.

 

1. ERRORS HAVING REFERENCE TO

MODERN LIBERALISM

 

77. 77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. — Allocution “Nemo vestrum,” July 26, 1855.

 

78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. — Allocution

 

79. Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.

 

80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.- -Allocution “Jamdudum cernimus,” March 18, 1861.

 

The faith teaches us and human reason demonstrates that a double order of things exists, and that we must therefore distinguish between the two earthly powers, the one of natural origin which provides for secular affairs and the tranquillity of human society, the other of supernatural origin, which presides over the City of God, that is to say the Church of Christ, which has been divinely instituted for the sake of souls and of eternal salvation…. The duties of this twofold power are most wisely ordered in such a way that to God is given what is God’s (Matt. 22:21), and because of God to Caesar what is Caesar’s, who is great because he is smaller than heaven. Certainly the Church has never disobeyed this divine command, the Church which always and everywhere instructs the faithful to show the respect which they should inviolably have for the supreme authority and its secular rights….

. . . Venerable Brethren, you see clearly enough how sad and full of perils is the condition of Catholics in the regions of Europe which We have mentioned. Nor are things any better or circumstances calmer in America, where some regions are so hostile to Catholics that their governments seem to deny by their actions the Catholic faith they claim to profess. In fact, there, for the last few years, a ferocious war on the Church, its institutions and the rights of the Apostolic See has been raging…. Venerable Brothers, it is surprising that in our time such a great war is being waged against the Catholic Church. But anyone who knows the nature, desires and intentions of the sects, whether they be called masonic or bear another name, and compares them with the nature the systems and the vastness of the obstacles by which the Church has been assailed almost everywhere, cannot doubt that the present misfortune must mainly be imputed to the frauds and machinations of these sects. It is from them that the synagogue of Satan, which gathers its troops against the Church of Christ, takes its strength.

 

In the past Our predecessors, vigilant even from the beginning in Israel, had already denounced them to the kings and the nations, and had condemned them time and time again, and even We have not failed in this duty. If those who would have been able to avert such a deadly scourge had only had more faith in the supreme Pastors of the Church! But this scourge, winding through sinuous caverns, . . . deceiving many with astute frauds, finally has arrived at the point where it comes forth impetuously from its hiding places and triumphs as a powerful master. Since the throng of its propagandists has grown enormously, these wicked groups think that they have already become masters of the world and that they have almost reached their pre-established goal. Having sometimes obtained what they desired, and that is power, in several countries, they boldly turn the help of powers and authorities which they have secured to trying to submit the Church of God to the most cruel servitude, to undermine the foundations on which it rests, to contaminate its splendid qualities; and, moreover, to strike it with frequent blows, to shake it, to overthrow it, and, if possible, to make it disappear completely from the earth.

 

Things being thus, Venerable Brothers, make every effort to defend the faithful which are entrusted to you against the insidious contagion of these sects and to save from perdition those who unfortunately have inscribed themselves in such sects. Make known and attack those who, whether suffering from, or planning, deception, are not afraid to affirm that these shady congregations aim only at the profit of society, at progress and mutual benefit. Explain to them often and impress deeply on their souls the Papal constitutions on this subject and teach, them that the masonic associations are anathematized by them not only in Europe but also in America and wherever they may be in the whole world.

 

To the Archbishops and Bishops of Prussia concerning the situation of the Catholic Church faced with persecution by that Government….

But although they (the bishops resisting persecution) should be praised rather than pitied, the scorn of episcopal dignity, the violation of the liberty and the rights of the Church, the ill treatment which does not only oppress those dioceses, but also the others of the Kingdom of Prussia, demand that We, owing to the Apostolic office with which God has entrusted us in spite of Our insufficient merit, protest against laws which have produced such great evils and make one fear even greater ones; and as far as we are able to do so with the sacred authority of divine law, We vindicate for the Church the freedom which has been trodden underfoot with sacrilegious violence. That is why by this letter we intend to do Our duty by announcing openly to all those whom this matter concerns and to the whole Catholic world, that these laws are null and void because they are absolutely contrary to the divine constitution of the Church. In fact, with respect to matters which concern the holy ministry, Our Lord did not put the mighty of this century in charge, but Saint Peter, whom he entrusted not only with feeding his sheep, but also the goats; therefore no power in the world, however great it may be, can deprive of the pastoral office those whom the Holy Ghost has made Bishops in order to feed the Church of God.

– Finis –