Pope Pius XII on Bringing Up Children

Words of wisdom from the Holy Father Pope Pius XII on the proper Christian upbringing of children:

Address to a gathering of women of Catholic Action, teaching nuns, school mistresses and representatives of the children of Catholic Action, October 26, 1941 :

"It is a curious circumstance and, as Pope Pius XI remarked in his Encyclical, a lamentable one, that whereas no one would dream of suddenly becoming a mechanic or an engineer, a doctor or a lawyer, without any apprenticeship or preparation, yet every day there are numbers of young men and women who marry without giving an instant's thought to preparing themselves for the arduous work of educating their children which awaits them.

Fortunate the child whose mother stands by its cradle like a guardian angel to inspire and lead it in the path of goodness! And so, while we congratulate you upon what you have already achieved, we cannot but exhort you warmly and anew to develop those splendid organisations which are doing so much to provide for every rank and social class educators conscious of their high mission, in mind and bearing alert against evil and zealous to promote good. Such sentiments in a woman and a mother give her the right to that reverence and dignity which belong to a man's loyal helpmeet; such a mother is like a pillar, for she is the central support of the home; she is like a beacon whose light gives an example to the parish and brings illumination to the pious associations of which she is a member.

Especially opportune are those organisations of your Union of Catholic Action which seek to help and train the young wife before childbearing and during the infancy of her offspring. In this you are doing an angel's work, watching over the mother and the little one she bears within her, and then, when the baby comes, standing by the cot to help the mother as with breast and smile she feeds the body and soul of the tiny angel that Heaven has sent her.

To woman God has given the sacred mission, painful yet how joyous, of maternity; and to her too, more than to anyone else, is entrusted the first education of the child in its early months and years.

Of heredity, which may exercise such an influence upon the future cast of a child's character, we will not speak except to say that this hidden heritage sometimes points an accusing finger at the irregular life of the parents, who are thus gravely responsible for making it difficult for their offspring to lead
a truly Christian life.

Many of the moral characteristics which you see in the youth or the man owe their origin to the manner and circumstances of his first upbringing in infancy: purely organic habits contracted at that time may later prove a serious obstacle to the spiritual life of the soul. And so you will make
it your special care in the treatment of your child to observe the prescriptions of a perfect hygiene, so that when it comes to the use of reason its bodily organs and faculties will be healthy and robust and free from distorted tendencies. This is the reason why, except where it is quite impossible, it is most desirable that the mother should feed her child at her own breast. Who shall say what mysterious influences are exerted upon the growth of that little creature by the mother upon whom it depends entirely for its development.

Have you observed those little eyes, wide open, restlessly questioning, their glance darting from this thing to that, following a movement or a gesture, already expressing joy or pain, anger and obstinacy, and giving other signs of those little passions that nestle in the heart of man even before the tiny lips have learned to utter a word? This is perfectly natural. Notwithstanding what certain thinkers have maintained, we are not born endowed with knowledge or with the memories and dreams of a life already lived.

The mind of the child as it comes forth from its mother's womb is a page upon which nothing is written; from hour to hour as it passes on its way from the cradle to the tomb its eyes and other senses, internal and external, transmit the life of the world through their own vital activity, and will write upon that page the images and ideas of the things among which it lives. From that early age a loving look, a warning word, must teach the child not to yield to all its impressions, and as reason dawns it must learn to discriminate and to master the vagaries of its sensations; in a word, under the
guidance and admonition of the mother it must begin the work of its own education.

Train the mind of your children. Do not give them wrong ideas or wrong reasons for things. Whatever their questions may be, do not answer them with evasions or untrue statements, which their minds rarely accept, but take occasion from them lovingly and patiently to train their minds, which
want only to open to the truth and to grasp it with the first ingenuous gropings of their reasoning and reflective powers. Who can say what many a genius may not owe to the prolonged and trustful questionings of a childhood at the home fireside !

Train the character of your children. Correct their faults, encourage and cultivate their good qualities and co-ordinate them with that stability which will make for resolution in after life. Your children, conscious as they grow up and as they begin to think and will, that they are guided by a good parental will, constant and strong, free from violence and anger, not subject to weakness or inconsistency, will learn in time to see therein the interpreter of another and higher will, the will of God, and so they will plant in their souls the seeds of those early moral habits which fashion and sustain a character, train it to self-control in moments of crisis and to courage in the face of conflict or sacrifice, and imbue
it with a deep sense of Christian duty.

Train their hearts. Frequently the decision of a man's destiny, the ruin of his character or a grave danger threatening him may be traced to his childish years when his heart was spoiled by the fond flattery, silly fussing and foolish indulgence of misguided parents. The impressionable little heart became accustomed to see all things revolve and gravitate around it, to find all things yielding to its will and caprice, and so there took root in it that boundless egoism of which the parents themselves were later to become the first victims.

All this is often the just penalty of the selfishness of parents who deny their only child the joy of having little brothers and sisters who, sharing in the mother's love, would have accustomed him to think of others besides himself.

But the day will come when the childish heart will feel fresh impulses stirring within it; new desires will disturb the serenity of those early years. In that time of trial, Christian mothers, remember that to train the heart means to train the will to resist the attacks of evil and the insidious temptations of passion. During that period of transition from the unconscious purity of infancy to the triumphant purity of adolescence you have a task of the highest importance to fulfil. You have to prepare your sons and daughters so that they may pass with unfaltering step, like those who pick their way among serpents, through that time of crisis and physical change; and pass through it without losing anything of the joy of innocence, preserving intact that natural instinct of modesty with which Providence has girt them as a check upon wayward passion.

That sense of modesty, which in its spontaneous abhorrence from the impure is akin to the sense of religion, is made of little account in these days; but you, mothers, will take care that they do not lose it through indecency in dress or self adornment, through unbecoming familiarities or immoral spectacles; on the contrary, you will seek to make it more delicate and alert, more upright and sincere. You will keep a watchful eye on their steps. You will not suffer the whiteness of their souls to be stained and contaminated by corrupt and corrupting company. You will inspire them with a high esteem and jealous love for purity, advising them to commend themselves to the sure and motherly protection of the Immaculate Virgin.

Finally, with the discretion of a mother and a teacher, and thanks to the open-hearted confidence with which you have been able to inspire your children, you will not fail to watch for and to discern the moment in which certain unspoken questions have occurred to their minds and are troubling their senses. It will then be your duty to your daughters, the father's duty to your sons, carefully and delicately to unveil the truth as far as it appears necessary, to give a prudent, true and Christian answer to those questions, and set their minds at rest. If imparted by the lips of Christian parents, at the proper time, in the proper measure, and with the proper precautions, the revelation of the mysterious and marvellous laws of life will be received by them with reverence and gratitude, and will enlighten their minds with far less danger than if they learned them haphazard, from some disturbing encounter, from secret conversations, through information received from over-sophisticated companions, or from clandestine reading, the more dangerous and pernicious as secrecy
inflames the imagination and troubles the senses. Your words, if they are wise and discreet, will prove a safeguard and a warning in the midst of the temptations and the corruption which surround them, "because foreseen, an arrow comes more slowly".

But in this great work of the Christian education of your sons and daughters you well understand that training in the home, however wise, however thorough, is not enough. It needs to be supplemented and perfected by the powerful aid of religion. From the moment of baptism the priest possesses the authority of a spiritual father and a pastor over your children, and you must co-operate with him in teaching them those first rudiments of catechism and piety which are the only basis of a solid education, and of which you, the earliest teachers of your children, ought to have a sufficient and sure
knowledge. You cannot teach what you do not know yourselves. Teach them to love God, to love Christ, to love our Mother the Church and the pastors of the Church who are your guides. Love the catechism and teach your children to love it; it is the great handbook of the love and fear of God,
of Christian wisdom and of eternal life.

In your work of education, which is many sided, you will feel the need and the obligation of having recourse to others to help you. Choose helpers who are Christians like yourselves, and choose them with all the care that is called for by the treasure which you are entrusting to them: you are committing to them the faith, the purity and the piety of your children. But when you have chosen them you must not think that you are henceforth liberated from your duty and your vigilance: you must co-operate with them.

Some mothers may say children are so difficult to manage nowadays! I can do nothing with that son of mine; that daughter of mine is impossible ! Admittedly many boys and girls at the age of twelve or fifteen show themselves intractable. But why? Because when they were two or three years old they were allowed to do as they pleased. True, some temperaments are ungrateful and rebellious; but however unresponsive, however obstinate, he is still your child. Would you love him any the less than his brothers and sisters if he were sickly or deformed? God has given him to you; see that you do not treat him as the outcast of the family. No child is so unruly that he cannot be trained with care, patience and love; and it will rarely happen that even the stoniest and most unpromising soil will not bear some flower of submission and virtue, if only an unreasonable severity does not run the risk of exterminating the seed of good will which even the proudest soul has hidden within it.

The whole education of your children would be ruined were they to discover in their parents and their eyes are sharp enough to see any signs of favouritism, undue preferences, or antipathies in regard to any of them. For your own good and for the good of the family it must be clear that, whether you use measured severity or give encouragement and caresses, you have an equal love for all, a love which
makes no distinction save for the correction of evil or for the encouragement of good. Have you not received them all equally from God?

What a majestic figure is that of the mother in the home as she fulfils her destiny at the cradle side, the nurse and teacher of her little ones! Hers is truly a task full of labour, and we should be tempted to deem her unequal to it were it not for the grace of God which is ever at hand to enlighten, direct and sustain her in her daily anxieties and toil; were it not too for those other educators, mother-like in spirit and energy, whom she calls to aid her in the formation of these youthful souls. Imploring God to fill you to overflowing with His graces and to give increase to your manifold labours on behalf of the young entrusted to you, we grant you from our heart, as a pledge of heavenly favours, our fatherly Apostolic Blessing."

Modernist tactics according to "Pascendi Dominici Gregis" by St Pius X

As part of my ongoing series of posts on Pope St Pius X, canonized by Pius XII on May 29, 1954, (see here) today I would like to address the encyclical "Pascendi Dominici Gregis" of St Pius X dealing with the errors and insidious tactics of the modernists. The points made in the encyclical are of great relevance for understanding the problems in the modern church, infested as it with the ideology of modernism. And it is precisely because, as St Pius X points out, that modernists want to stay inside the Church that they are able so effectively to spread their poison throughout the veins of the Church, and hence why they are so dangerous. They achieve this by cloaking their well-formed set of doctrines in ambiguity or confusion, giving one the impression of plausible deniability.

As we head into the "synod of doom" in October, the tactics of the modernists are important to bear in mind, as we will hear notions of applying false "mercy" to those living in a state of adultery, other irregular unions, and even sodomy, under ambiguous, confused and misleading language, but that will ultimately have one clear purpose in mind: to widen the narrow and straight path that leads to Heaven for "modern man", who is unwilling to deny himself, pick up his cross, and follow Our Lord on the path to Calvary.

This article by Fr. Francois Knittel was originally published in the April 2004 issue of the "Angelus Magazine":

"Modernist tactics according Pascendi Gregis

We wish to honor Pope St. Pius X, the first canonized pontiff that the good Lord gave us since St. Pius V, by remembering his teachings. The task is not easy, since the teachings of his 11-year pontificate are abundant: his Catechism;[1] frequent Communion[2] and at an early age;[3] Catholic Action;[4] devotion to Our Lady;[5] the responsibility of those who govern the Church;[6] the Priesthood;[7] the doctrine of St. Thomas of Aquinas[8] and that of many others.
Some of the most interesting of St. Pius X's teachings to recall are those on Modernism. The three documents vital to the subject are Lamentabili Sane (July 3, 1907), Pascendi Dominici Gregis (Sept. 8, 1907), and Sacrorum Antistium (the "Oath Against Modernism", Sept. 1, 1910). Without any doubt, the most well-known aspect of this teaching on Modernism is the description that St. Pius X gives of the successive faces of the Modernist: the philosopher, believer, theologian, critic, apologist, and reformer. It is a long and arduous text that measures up to the challenge which confronted the Church and its magisterium.
As for us, we will emphasize what St. Pius X wrote on the tactics of the Modernists. The holy Pope was worried not only about the doctrinal aspects of this question, but also about the progress of this error in minds and hearts. How could a doctrine so complex, overwhelming, and contrary to the natural structure of human intelligence have such dissemination? How can we justify all the new measures taken by the Pope—Anti-Modernist Oath, vigilance counsels, exclusion of Modernists from the priesthood and teaching positions, prohibition to publish, control over priestly conventions—knowing that the Church always had to fight against one heresy or other in the course of its history? Why such particular treatment? From the very beginning of his encyclical on Modernism, St. Pius X said:

Still it must be confessed that the number of the enemies of the Cross of Christ has in this days increased exceedingly, who are striving, by arts, entirely new and full of subtlety, to destroy the vital energy of the Church, and, if they can, to overthrow utterly Christ's kingdom itself.[9]

What are these new arts full of subtlety used by the Modernists unmasked by the Pontiff?

Enemies within

Above all, they are the enemy inside the Church itself. For if we consult our catechism, we will see that those who are outside the Church are the infidels, the heretics, the schismatics, and the apostates. Some were never part of the Church (infidels), some abandoned the Church because of their sins against the Faith (heretics and apostates), or against charity (schismatics), but all, some sooner than others, separated themselves from the Church. That very same separation had the advantage of clarifying the situation and alerting the Catholic faithful against the teachings and actions of these “devouring wolves.”
Nothing of the sort happened with the Modernists whose primary characteristic is to try to stay within the Church at all cost:

That we make no delay in this matter is rendered necessary especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; they lie hid, a thing to be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart, and are the more mischievous, the less conspicuous they appear.[10]
[W]e allude... to many who belong to the Catholic laity, nay, and this is far more lamentable, to the ranks of the priesthood itself,... and lost to all sense of modesty, vaunt themselves as reformers of the Church.
...And this policy they follow willingly and wittingly, both because it is part of their system that authority is to be stimulated but not dethroned, and because it is necessary for them to remain within the ranks of the Church in order that they may gradually transform the collective conscience—thus unconsciously avowing that the common conscience is not with them, and that they have no right to claim to be its interpreters.[11]

Thus it is obvious that there is a firm desire not to get out of the visible structure of the Church, so that they can, at their whim, modify it from the inside. These are the wolves mentioned by Our Lord, “in the clothing of sheep” (Mt. 7:15). Their dissimulation is not accidental, but essential to their works; without it they could not do anything.

Destroying the Catholic Faith itself

By remaining within the Church under false pretenses, the Modernists try to modify, and thus destroy, the Catholic Faith. Their attacks are not going to be against an institution or a dogma in particular, but will aim at the very virtue of faith:

Moreover they lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fires. And having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to disseminate poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic Truth from which they hold their hand, none that they do not strive to corrupt.[12]
Certainly this suffices to show superabundantly by how many roads Modernism leads to the annihilation of all religion. The first step in this direction was taken by Protestantism; the second is made by Modernism; the next will plunge headlong into atheism.[13]
And now, can anybody who takes a survey of the whole system be surprised that We should define it as the synthesis of all heresies? Were one to attempt the task of collecting together all the errors that have been broached against the faith and to concentrate the sap and substance of them all into one, he could no better succeed than the Modernists have done.[14]

It is true that any heresy destroys the Catholic Faith by implicitly doubting the authority of God the Revealer. For if we believe in the revealed truths (Trinity, Incarnation, Redemption, Holy Eucharist, etc.) it is not by personal taste, whim, or opinion, nor because said truths are evident. The only true motive that makes us believe without the shadow of a doubt is precisely the authority of God, who cannot lie, who cannot be in error, who cannot be ignorant. But to deny a dogma is the equivalent of denying God, who unveiled His mysteries for us, His inerrancy and infallibility. It is in that sense that willful heresy will result in the loss of the virtue of faith.
Modernism, as St. Pius X teaches, not only will result in the loss of the virtue of faith like any other heresy, but will even make the existence of said virtue impossible. In Modernism, everything is reduced to a natural dimension, everything is enclosed in the subject, everything is borne out of the desires coming from the depth of consciousness. There is no longer any room for supernatural, mysterious, external, and objective realities. The problem is no longer on this or that particular point of doctrine or morals, but it is the very possibility of the act of faith as defined by our catechism which is destroyed.

Hence “there is no part of Catholic truth which they do not strive to destroy.” Hence also the definition of Modernism as “the synthesis of all heresies.” Hence finally, the ultimate consequence of this revolutionary movement is “atheism.”

Smokescreen of confusion in Modernist doctrine

At the service of his will to effect the radical subversion of Catholic doctrine within the Church, the Modernist will use several subterfuges. First, he will mix in his speeches and writings, in a strange and dangerous fashion, Catholicism and Rationalism. What is Rationalism? Pope Pius IX defined it in the Syllabus of Errors (1864) as:

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 forces, to secure the welfare of men and nations. (Condemned Propostion No. 3)

Upon reading this definition of Rationalism, we cannot but notice the radical opposition between Rationalism and the Catholic Faith. One of the infallible signs betraying the Modernist character of an author or some writing, is precisely that adulterous union between Catholicism and Rationalism:

For they double the part of the rationalist and Catholic, and this so craftily that they easily lead the unwary into error.[15]
Hence, in their books you find some things that might well be expressed by a Catholic, but in the next page you will find other things which might have been dictated by a rationalist.[16]

This adulterous union between Catholic thought and rationalist thought is the direct result of the Modernist's will to stay within the Church in order to change the Faith from inside. To speak clearly against the Faith would immediately render them visible and mark them in everyone's eyes with the infamous seal of heresy and apostasy! That is why they never speak clearly.
Every Modernist sustains and comprises within himself many personalities which appear and disappear according to the necessities of the cause and the opportunities of the moment. It is this evidence which gave the encyclical Pascendi its particular structure. To reveal the Modernist in hiding, St. Pius X had to explain in detail all the disguises, tricks and feints used by the Modernist to avoid the judgment of the Magisterium:

It must be first noted that every Modernist sustains and comprises within himself many personalities: he is a philosopher, a believer, a theologian, an historian, a critic, an apologist, a reformer. These roles must be clearly distinguished from one another by all who would accurately know their system and thoroughly comprehend the principles and consequences of their doctrines.[17]

Lastly, the final trait of the Modernist: he gives the impression that his doctrines lack global vision. Thus, in the eyes of an unwary Catholic, the doctrines of the Modernists will appear fluctuating, insecure, indecisive, and even contradictory. Pope Pius X did not share that view as he explained in several instances:

But since the Modernists... employ a very clever artifice, namely, to present their doctrines without order and systematic arrangement into one whole, scattered and disjointed one from another, so as to appear to be in doubt and uncertainty, while in reality they are firm and steadfast, it will be of ad vantage... to bring their teachings together here into one group, and to point out the connection between them, and thus to pass an examination of the sources of the errors, and to prescribe remedies for averting the evil.[18]
In the writing and addresses they seem not infrequently to advocate now one doctrine now another so that one would be disposed to regard them as vague and doubtful. But there is a reason for this, and it is to be found in their ideas as to the mutual separation of science and faith.[19]
It may be... that some may think We have dwelt too long on this exposition of the doctrines of the Modernists. But it was necessary, both in order to refute their customary charge that We do not understand their ideas, and to show that their system does not consist in scattered and unconnected theories but in a perfectly organized body, all the parts of which are solidly joined so that it is not possible to admit one without admitting all.[20]

Undoubtedly, one of the benefits of Pascendi Gregis was to show the Modernist doctrine in all its scope and as a coherent system. To stick one's finger into the Modernist machinery is to lose your whole body. To be Modernist in history will lead, little by little, to become so in exegesis and philosophy as well. The adulterous union between Catholic principles and rationalist principles is a fundamental perversion very frequently condemned by the Popes.

Practice of Modernism

After showing us how the Modernists are the enemy within, who endanger the very Faith without ever giving a global overview of their system, Pope Pius X unmasked three practical points that make the Modernists actions particularly dangerous. When in spite of their deceptions, some Modernists are unmasked by the authority, called to public retractation, or even publicly condemned, they usually give the appearance of submission to the measures that affect them:

But you know how fruitless has been Our action. They bowed their head for a moment but it was soon uplifted more arrogantly than ever.[21]
And thus, here again a way must be found to save the full rights of authority on the one hand and of liberty on the other. In the meanwhile the proper course for the Catholic will be to proclaim publicly his profound respect for authority-and continue to follow his own bent.[22]
And so they go their own way, reprimands and condemnations notwithstanding, masking an incredible audacity under a mock semblance of humility. While they make a show of bowing their heads, their hands and minds are more intent than ever on carrying out their purposes.[23]

That apparent submission is perfectly coherent with the deliberate decision of the Modernists to stay in the Church. If they rebelled against authority or openly despised the truths of our Faith, they would thus unmask themselves. That apparent submission to the decisions of the authorities, even hard penalties, is a key element of Modernist tactics.
The other side of the coin in that the return of a Modernist to the totality of the Faith is always doubtful. How can one be certain of the sincerity of such a conversion when dissimulation and hypocrisy are at the root of the system? Didn't all these fashionable Modernist theologians of the last 50 years repeatedly swear the Anti-Modernist Oath: Chenu, Rahner, Congar, Küng, Drewerman and Boff, to mention a few? With that apparent submission to the authorities, Modernists frequently lead as well an externally exemplary life:

To this must be added the fact, which indeed is well calculated to deceive souls, that they lead a life of the greatest activity, of assiduous and ardent application to every branch of learning, and that they possess, as a rule, a reputation for the strictest morality.[24]

Here, too, they could not remain in the Church without apparently keeping the discipline of the Church and its way of life. The apostate or the one who seeks laicization will bring himself to the attention of the Catholic faithful.
In virtue of the necessary connection between what one thinks and what one does, it is legitimate to think that this exemplary life is nothing but external. Let us recall for instance, the weird relations maintained by Teilhard de Chardin, Karl Rahner,[25] or Hans Urs von Balthasar,[26] and of the prince of liberation theologians, the Franciscan Leonardo Boff who recently abandoned the priesthood.[27]

Attracting public opinion

The last Modernist tactic indicated by Pope Pius X is the manipulation of public opinion. This manipulation is done in two phases:

1. It is necessary to silence any serious opponent of Modernism. Any serious debate with said opponent will be avoided, his works opposed to Modernism will not be mentioned, and their publication will even be prevented if possible, and
2. at the same time, every Modernist speech or book will be praised to the sky. The use and multiplication of pen names used by some Modernist authors will give the impression of a wave of opinion, when frequently, in fact, we are dealing with a few authors singing one another's praises.

...[t]he boundless effrontery of these men. Let one but open his mouth and the others applaud him in chorus, proclaiming that science has made another step forward; let an outsider but hint at a desire to inspect the new discovery with his own eyes, and they are on him in a body; deny it, and you are an ignoramus; embrace and defend it, and there is no praise too warm for you. In this way they win over any who, did they but realize what they are doing, would shrink back with horror.[28]
But of all the insults they heap on them, those of ignorance and obstinacy are the favorites. When an adversary rises up against them with an erudition and force that render him redoubtable, they try to make a conspiracy of silence around him to nullify the effects of his attacks, while in flagrant contrast with this policy towards Catholics, they load with constant praise the writers who range themselves on their side.[29]
When one of their numbers falls under the condemnation of the Church the rest of them, to the horror of good Catholics, gather round him, heap public praise upon him, venerate him almost as a martyr to truth.[30]
Under their own names and under pseudonyms they publish numbers of books, newspapers, reviews, and sometimes one and the same writer adopts a variety of pseudonyms to trap the incautious reader into believing in a whole multitude of Modernist writers.[31]

When truth is no longer the measure of the validity of an argument, then there is no other way than to look for palliatives to cover its intrinsic weakness. In an era of democracy, truth does not count for much, only the majority; neither does honesty, only power and fame. On the contrary, woe to those who do not blow with the prevalent winds of history. Woe to those who do not board the great ship of progress. They will be buried alive in a lead coffin. They will not find publishers for their books, nor a single magazine for their articles, no chair for them to teach, and the faithful will never hear their voice even though it is the voice of the Good Shepherd.

A secret society?

To conclude his analysis of Modernist tactics with practical advice, Pope Pius X called for the unmasking of Modernism. Faced with such hypocritical and deceitful error, only one thing needs to be done: bring it out to the light of day so that all can see its evil.

We must now break silence, in order to expose before the whole Church in their true colors those men who have assumed this evil disguise.[32]

It is very interesting to compare this order of the Holy Pontiff with that of his predecessor Pope Leo XIII in the encyclical Humanum Genus in condemnation of Freemasonry:

We wish it to be your rule first of all to tear away the mask from Freemasonry, and to let it be seen as it really is.[33]

The comparison of these two texts—one on Modernism and the other on Freemasonry—does suggest a similarity between these two revolutionary events. The two Pontiffs seems to suggest a kinship between the Masonic sect and the Modernist sect. Perhaps some will think excessive the use of the expression “Modernist sect.” However, here too, we are only echoing the teachings of Pope St. Pius X:

We think it is obvious to every bishop that the type of men called Modernists, whose personality was described in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, have not stopped agitating in order to disturb the peace of the Church. Nor have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group. In this way they are injecting the virus of their doctrine into the veins of Christian society, publishing books and articles either unsigned or under false names. A fresh and careful reading of Our said encyclical reveals clearly that this deliberate shrewdness is to be expected from those men We described in it. They are enemies all the more formidable as they are so close. They take advantage of their ministry by offering their poisoned food and catching the unguarded by surprise. They supply a false doctrine which is the compendium of all errors.[34]

Thus, St. Pius X did speak of the Modernists as an “underground group.” Few authors have noticed and examined this detail. In an article of April 1964, Jean Madiran did made the following observations:

In the encyclical Pascendi, Pope Pius X mentioned several times and in various manners the “occult” action of Modernists. Is it a secret society in the strict sense? The encyclical Pascendi implies it though does not affirm it clearly.
Three years later, however, this formal accusation was made by Pope Pius X (Sacrorum Antistitum of Sept. 1, 1910):
[the] Modernists, whose personality was described in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, have not stopped agitating in order to disturb the peace of the Church. Neither have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group.
...We have consulted books and magazines that gave the “history” or the “results” of Modernism since World War II: we did not find any mention of this specific aspect of the question. Not only is the secret society is omitted, but the presentation of Modernism made by many authors implicitly denied it ever existed. It is denied by the fact that their presentation of Modernism is incompatible with the existence of the secret society of Modernists. They do mention writers, investigators, editors, and clergymen undoubtedly in error, but guileless souls: certainly true for many, but insufficient to explain the historical phenomenon of Modernism. It does not explain its organized preponderance, nor the concerted campaigns, nor the medley of insults and praises, nor the premeditated tactics, nor the occult activities described in the encyclical Pascendi. Neither does it explain the accusation of “underground group” of the Motu Proprio of Sept. 1, 1910 [Sacrorum Antistitum].
All the stories of the Modernist crisis, these “analyses” of Modernism, and the judgments expressed have been radically corrupted because of the systematic ignorance and dissimulation of such an important element of judgment... By hiding the existence of the secret society, the historians obviously did not shed any light on its disappearance.
Nonetheless, this is an unresolved historical question, indeed, an open question, that is, when did the secret society of Modernists cease to exist? We cannot even ask if they were “reconstituted” at a later date, for to be reconstituted it is necessary to have ceased to exist; but we do not know if and when it was dissolved. Not only is no answer given, but the question itself is not even raised.
Historians of the crisis think that the encyclical Pascendi in 1907 mortally wounded Modernism and that that was the end of it, and even too brutal and complete of an end. That was not the position of Pope Pius X who, three years later, on Sept. 1, 1910, clearly affirmed: “Nor have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group.” They had not ceased. But then, when did they cease? Or did they ever cease?[35]

The Modernist is an apostate and a traitor

In conclusion, we will let Fr. Calmel, O.P., give us a panoramic view of the question of Modernism in its theological, moral, spiritual, and tactical aspects:

The classic heretic—Arius, Nestorius, Luther—even if he had some wistful desire to remain in the Catholic Church, did everything necessary to be ousted. He fought openly against Divine Revelation, the sacred deposit of which is guarded by the Church. The heretic, or more accurately the Modernist apostate like a Loisy or Teilhard de Chardin, deliberately rejects the whole doctrine of the Church, but desires to remain in the Church and takes the necessary measures to stay in. He dissembles and feigns with the hope of changing the Church in the long run—or, as the Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin wrote, to rectify the Faith — from the inside. The Modernist has in common with other heretics the rejection of Catholic Revelation. But he differentiates himself from other heretics, because he hides this rejection. We must insist on this: the Modernist is an apostate and a traitor.
You may ask, “Since the position of the Modernists is fundamentally disloyal, how can he keep it all his life without destroying his internal mental balance?” Is psychological balance compatible with a perpetually maintained duplicity in the most supreme questions? We must answer that yes it is, as far as the ringleaders are concerned.
With respect to the followers, the question of the psychological imbalance within a never-failing hypocrisy is less acute. When these followers are priests—alas, only too frequently—they usually end up marrying, thus putting an end to the necessity of dissimulation. For once they are married, they will continue to be apostate, but will stop being Modernists. Things become clearer with respect to them. They no longer have to fake the virtues of a Catholic priest.
Concerning the ringleaders, prelates with important charges, if they can practice their Modernism without serious damage, it is with a doubt because they are distracted by accomplices who never get tired of singing their praises. Distracted from looking at themselves, they manage to escape the burning questions of a slowly dying moral conscience.
In any case, the blindness of the mind and the hardening of the heart will always be the end of the road, but without necessarily leading to dementia. We are certain that closing oneself in spiritual darkness does not happen at once, but it is prepared slowly by numerous acts of resistance to grace. This divine chastisement is merited by numerous sins. What is more, if any other sinner can recognize himself as such and beg divine mercy, we must admit that a sinner of that type cannot convert if not for a great miracle of grace: a very rare one.

Translated for Angelus Press by Fr. Jaime Pazat de Lys of the Society of St. Pius X. The author, Fr. Francis Knittel, was ordained for the Society of St. Pius X in 1989 and a former District Superior of Mexico.
BOOK: One Hundred Years of Modernism >
Footnotes
1 Acerbo Nimis (April 15, 1905).
2 Sacra Tridentina Synodus (Dec. 20, 1905).
3 Quam Singulari (Aug. 8, 1910).
4 Il Fermo Proposito (June 11, 1905).
5 Ad Diem Ilium Laetissimum (Feb. 2, 1904).
6 Jucunda Sane (Mar. 12, 1904).
7 Haerent Animo (Aug. 4, 1908).
8 Doctoris Angelicis (June 29, 1914).
9 Pascendi Dominici Gregis, ed. Claudia Carlin (Pierian Press), p. 71.
10 Ibid., col. 2.
11 Ibid., p. 83, col. 2.
12 Ibid., p. 72, col. 1.
13 Ibid., p. 90, col. 1.
14 Ibid., p. 89, col. 1.
15 Ibid., p. 72, col. 1.
16 Ibid., p. 78, cols. 1,2.
17 Ibid., p. 72, col. 2.
18 Ibid., p. 72, col 2.
19 Ibid., p. 78,col. 1.
20 Ibid., p. 88, col. 1.
21 AW., p. 72, col. 1.
22 AW, p. 82, col. 1.
23 AW., p. 83, col. 2.
24 Ibid., p. 72, col. 1.
25 Courrier de Rome, (March 1995), p. 8.
26 Si Si No No, Italian ed., (Dec. 1992), p. 7.
27 Translator's note: He died shortly thereafter.
28 Pascendi, p. 86, col. 2.
29 Ibid., p. 9l, col. 2; p. 92, col 1.
30 Ibid., p.92, col. 1.
31 Ibid., p. 92, col. 1.
32 AW., p. 72, cols. 1, 2.
33 The Papal Encyclicals, vol. 2 (Pierian Press), p. 99, col. 2.
34 Sacrorum Antistitum (Sept. 1, 1910), The Doctrinal Writings of St. Pius X (Manilla, Philippine Islands: Sinag-tala Publishers, 1974).
35 Author's translation of a Spanish translation (for which he could not find a reference) of an article originally in French.

"Notre Charge Apostolique", Encyclical of Pope St Pius X to the French Bishops on the errors of the Sillon

In continuation of my series of blog posts in commemoration of Pope St Pius X (canonized by Pius XII on May 29, 1954, see here), whose feast day was celebrated September 3 on the traditional catholic liturgical calendar, today I would like to focus on one of Pope Pius X's most important encyclicals: "Notre Charge Apostolique" (Our Apostolic Mandate), of August 15, 1910. It is a letter written to the French bishops on the errors of the "Sillon" movement which was formed during the reign of Leo XIII as a social movement whose aim was "to bring Catholicism into a greater conformity with French Republican and socialist ideals, in order to provide an alternative to Marxism and other anticlerical labour movements" (source), and to work for the improvement of the lower working classes. While it initially held to catholic orthodoxy, by the reign of Pius X it had absorbed many of the errors of modernism and the contemporary world, which can be summarized as essentially the errors of the French revolution: Liberty, Equality and Fraternity (not understood in the Catholic sense, but in the liberal sense of the 18th century "Enlightenment" philosophers). The errors of the Sillon were mainly an erroneous understanding of human liberty and dignity, where human liberty is not understood as the liberty to be free to do God's will but as a condition where man is free of authority, and where human dignity is understood in the sense of those liberal philosophers "of whom the Church does not at all feel proud" and dependent on this false idea of "human liberty". Once man is "free" from a higher authority as a result of this erroneous notion of "liberty" and "human dignity", these errors further lead to religious indifferentism and ultimately, as St Pius X notes, to apostasy.

 

I would argue that the errors of the "Sillon" are fundamentally the errors that have crippled the Church since Vatican II, which are essentially the errors of the French revolution: Liberty (Religious Liberty), Fraternity (Ecumenism), Equality (Collegiality). And if it seems far-fetched, even ludicrous or heretical to claim that Vatican II can be linked in any way to the ideas and philosophies that engendered the French revolution, consider this passage from Archbishop Lefebvre's "Open Letter to Confused Catholics" (source):

"The parallel I have drawn between the crisis in the Church and the French Revolution is not simply a metaphorical one. The influence of the philosophes of the eighteenth century, and of the upheaval that they produced in the world, has continued down to our times. Those who have injected that poison into the Church admit it to themselves. It was Cardinal Suenens who exclaimed, “Vatican II is the French Revolution in the Church” and among other unguarded declarations he added “One cannot understand the French or the Russian revolutions unless one knows something of the old regimes which they brought to an end… It is the same in church affairs: a reaction can only be judged in relation to the state of things that preceded it”. What preceded, and what he considered due for abolition, was that wonderful hierarchical construction culminating in the Pope, the Vicar of Christ on earth. He continued: “The Second Vatican Council marked the end of an epoch; and if we stand back from it a little more we see it marked the end of a series of epochs, the end of an age”.

Compare the above quoted candid admission by Cardinal Suenens of the revolutionary influence on Vatican II, with the comparison that the Sillonists themselves made of their movement with the same (from Pius X's "Notre Charge Apostolique"):

 "...they speak of Our Lord Jesus Christ with a familiarity supremely disrespectful, and that - their ideal being akin to that of the Revolution - they fear not to draw between the Gospel and the Revolution blasphemous comparisons for which the excuse cannot be made that they are due to some confused and over-hasty composition."

St Pius X condemns those who attempt to make a false dichotomy between the rigor of the gospel and the mercy of Christ shown towards sinners:

 

 "But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross."

 

The above passage is all too relevant for the discussion regarding the upcoming synod on the family, which is attempting to give the green to public adulterers receiving the Eucharist on a false notion of "mercy". Pius X here clearly states, on the contrary, that whilst Christ can be merciful towards sinners, He can be just as stern towards evil-doers: He does "...not respect their false ideas" , "He was as strong as he was gentle". Conversion is a necessary precondition to obtain mercy and salvation: "He instructed them [the lost sheep] in order to convert them and save them". In other words - attempting to widen the narrow and straight path that leads to heaven - "the royal way of the Cross"- in the name of a false "mercy" will lead to the perdition of souls. Regarding the so-called Synod "on the family", I would recommend this article from the "Voice of the Family" which outlines the sinister attempt that has been carried out in order to pervert unchangeable Catholic doctrine.

 

Finally, prophetically Pius X denounces those who have been attempting to set up a "civilization of love" post-Vatican II apart from the only civilization which can bring peace, charity and harmony to the world, Christian civilization:

"No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. OMNIA INSTAURARE IN CHRISTO..."

 "alarming and saddening at the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale of the Catholic Church, "the reign of love and justice" with workers coming from everywhere, of all religions and of no religion, with or without beliefs, so long as they forego what might divide them - their religious and philosophical convictions, and so long as they share what unites them - a "generous idealism and moral forces drawn from whence they can"

 Finally, Pius X warns that the spirit of the Sillon - its liberal, left-leaning tendencies bearing in essence the spirit of the French revolution, is dragging the world towards worldwide apostasy:

"And now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer..."

 The full text of the encyclical can be downloaded here, but I provide below a condensed version of the document with the most important paragraphs:

"Our Apostolic Mandate requires from Us that We watch over the purity of the Faith and the integrity of Catholic discipline. It requires from Us that We protect the faithful from evil and error; especially so when evil and error are presented in dynamic language which, concealing vague notions and ambiguous expressions with emotional and high-sounding words, is likely to set ablaze the hearts of men in pursuit of ideals which, whilst attractive, are nonetheless nefarious. Such were not so long ago the doctrines of the so-called philosophers of the 18th century, the doctrines of the Revolution and Liberalism which have been so often condemned; such are even today the theories of the Sillon which, under the glowing appearance of generosity, are all too often wanting in clarity, logic and truth. These theories do not belong to the Catholic or, for that matter, to the French Spirit...

This [the formation of the Sillon movement] was shortly after Our Predecessor Leo XIII of happy memory had issued his remarkable Encyclical on the condition of the working class. Speaking through her supreme leader, the Church had just poured out of the tenderness of her motherly love over the humble and the lowly, and it looked as though she was calling out for an ever growing number of people to labor for the restoration of order and justice in our uneasy society. Was it not opportune, then, for the leaders of the Sillon to come forward and place at the service of the Church their troops of young believers who could fulfill her wishes and her hopes? And, in fact, the Sillon did raise among the workers the standard of Jesus Christ, the symbol of salvation for peoples and nations...

The day came when perceptive observers could discern alarming trends within the Sillon; the Sillon was losing its way. Could it have been otherwise? Its leaders were young, full of enthusiasm and self-confidence. But they were not adequately equipped with historical knowledge, sound philosophy, and solid theology to tackle without danger the difficult social problems in which their work and their inclinations were involving them. They were not sufficiently equipped to be on their guard against the penetration of liberal and Protestant concepts on doctrine and obedience...

...The truth is that the Sillonist leaders are self-confessed and irrepressible idealists; they claim to regenerate the working class by first elevating the conscience of Man; they have a social doctrine, and they have religious and philosophical principles for the reconstruction of society upon new foundations; they have a particular conception of human dignity, freedom, justice and brotherhood; and, in an attempt to justify their social dreams, they put forward the Gospel, but interpreted in their own way; and what is even more serious, they call to witness Christ, but a diminished and distorted Christ...

Indeed, the Sillon proposes to raise up and re-educate the working class. But in this respect the principles of Catholic doctrine have been defined, and the history of Christian civilization bears witness to their beneficent fruitfulness. Our Predecessor of happy memory re-affirmed them in masterly documents, and all Catholics dealing with social questions have the duty to study them and to keep them in mind...  But what have the leaders of the Sillon done? Not only have they adopted a program and teaching different from that of Leo XIII...but they have openly rejected the program laid out by Leo XIII, and have adopted another which is diametrically opposed to it.

We know well that they flatter themselves with the idea of raising human dignity and the discredited condition of the working class...Certainly, We do not blame these efforts; they would be excellent in every respect if the Sillonist did not forget that a person’s progress consists in developing his natural abilities by fresh motivations; that it consists also in permitting these motivations to operate within the frame of, and in conformity with, the laws of human nature. But, on the contrary, by ignoring the laws governing human nature and by breaking the bounds within which they operate, the human person is lead, not toward progress, but towards death. This, nevertheless, is what they want to do with human society; they dream of changing its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future City built on different principles, and they dare to proclaim these more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon which the present Christian City rests.

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. OMNIA INSTAURARE IN CHRISTO.

The Sillon has a praise-worthy concern for human dignity, but it understands human dignity in the manner of some philosophers, of whom the Church does not at all feel proud. The first condition of that dignity is liberty, but viewed in the sense that, except in religious matters, each man is autonomous...

...The Sillon places public authority primarily in the people, from whom it then flows into the government in such a manner, however, that it continues to reside in the people. But Leo XIII absolutely condemned this doctrine in his Encyclical “Diuturnum Illud” on political government in which he said:

“Modern writers in great numbers, following in the footsteps of those who called themselves philosophers in the last century, declare that all power comes from the people; consequently those who exercise power in society do not exercise it from their own authority, but from an authority delegated to them by the people and on the condition that it can be revoked by the will of the people from whom they hold it. Quite contrary is the sentiment of Catholics who hold that the right of government derives from God as its natural and necessary principle.”

Admittedly, the Sillon holds that authority - which first places in the people - descends from God, but in such a way: “as to return from below upwards, whilst in the organization of the Church power descends from above downwards.”

But besides its being abnormal for the delegation of power to ascend, since it is in its nature to descend, Leo XIII refuted in advance this attempt to reconcile Catholic Doctrine with the error of philosophism. For, he continues: “It is necessary to remark here that those who preside over the government of public affairs may indeed, in certain cases, be chosen by the will and judgment of the multitude without repugnance or opposition to Catholic doctrine. But whilst this choice marks out the ruler, it does not confer upon him the authority to govern; it does not delegate the power, it designates the person who will be invested with it.” ...

Teaching such doctrines, and applying them to its internal organization, the Sillon, therefore, sows erroneous and fatal notions on authority, liberty and obedience, among your Catholic youth. The same is true of justice and equality; the Sillon says that it is striving to establish an era of equality which, by that very fact, would be also an era of greater justice. Thus, to the Sillon, every inequality of condition is an injustice, or at least, a diminution of justice? Here we have a principle that conflicts sharply with the nature of things, a principle conducive to jealously, injustice, and subversive to any social order...

The same [erroneous understanding of] applies to the notion of Fraternity which they found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting...

If, as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. But this union is attainable only by Catholic charity, and that is why Catholic charity alone can lead the people in the march of progress towards the ideal civilization...

The breath of the Revolution has passed this way, and We can conclude that, whilst the social doctrines of the Sillon are erroneous, its spirit is dangerous and its education disastrous...

There was a time when the Sillon, as such, was truly Catholic. It recognized but one moral force - Catholicism; and the Sillonists were wont to proclaim that Democracy would have to be Catholic or would not exist at all. A time came when they changed their minds. They left to each one his religion or his philosophy. They ceased to call themselves Catholics and, for the formula "Democracy will be Catholic" they substituted "Democracy will not be anti-Catholic", any more than it will be anti-Jewish or anti-Buddhist. This was the time of "the Greater Sillon". For the construction of the Future City they appealed to the workers of all religions and all sects. These were asked but one thing: to share the same social ideal, to respect all creeds, and to bring with them a certain supply of moral force. Admittedly: they declared that “The leaders of the Sillon place their religious faith above everything. But can they deny others the right to draw their moral energy from whence they can? In return, they expect others to respect their right to draw their own moral energy from the Catholic Faith. Accordingly they ask all those who want to change today's society in the direction of Democracy, not to oppose each other on account of the philosophical or religious convictions which may separate them, but to march hand in hand, not renouncing their convictions, but trying to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions. Perhaps a union will be effected on this ground of emulation between souls holding different religious or philosophical convictions.”

...alarming and saddening at the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale of the Catholic Church, "the reign of love and justice" with workers coming from everywhere, of all religions and of no religion, with or without beliefs, so long as they forego what might divide them - their religious and philosophical convictions, and so long as they share what unites them - a "generous idealism and moral forces drawn from whence they can"

...What are they going to produce? What is to come of this collaboration? A mere verbal and chimerical construction in which we shall see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality, and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of the people. Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train.

And now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer...

To such an extent that they speak of Our Lord Jesus Christ with a familiarity supremely disrespectful, and that - their ideal being akin to that of the Revolution - they fear not to draw between the Gospel and the Revolution blasphemous comparisons for which the excuse cannot be made that they are due to some confused and over-hasty composition...

As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them...Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body."

Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross...

Let them [the clerics selected to head the works of Catholic action] be convinced that...all that is needed is to take up again, with the help of the true workers for a social restoration, the organisms which the Revolution shattered, and to adapt them, in the same Christian spirit that inspired them, to the new environment arising from the material development of today’s society. Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists."

The Canonization of Pope St Pius X by Pope Pius XII

As part of my ongoing series of posts about St Pius X, whose feast day we celebrated yesterday in the traditional liturgical calendar of the Universal Church, I would like to highlight the importance which Pius XII himself gave to the canonization of Pius X, the arch-nemesis of modernists, the first pontiff to be canonized since Pius V. Imagine - three saintly popes in a row bearing the name of Pius (St Pius I of course was also a saint)! This seems indeed to be a blessed name among pontiffs. Will the next great pontiff by Pope Pius XIII? I sometimes wonder! During the year 1954, Pope Pius XII was ill with an intestinal illness which gave him severe bouts of hiccups, indeed he had been very frail and ill during a great part of the year. Despite this, he still managed to occupy himself with the arduous tasks of the day to day work of the Sovereign Pontiff, and Pius XII was sometimes so frail as if to appear that his spirit indeed was making up for what his physical strength was lacking. We cannot doubt that the Holy Ghost must have been greatly fortifying the Holy Father during this difficult time with His abundant graces.

No doubt one of the major reasons Pius XII felt an urgent need, and was an ardent promoter for raising Pius X to the glory of the altars was the menace of modernism - as St Pius X described it, "the synthesis of all heresies" - threatening the Church. Thus, through the canonization, the anti-modernist teachings of Pius X would thus in essence be given an "official" stamp of approval from the Holy Father, for all perpetuity, so that no modernist heretic that has come since has been, or ever will be able to, negate these teachings without separating himself from the orthodoxy proposed by the Church through the official, indeed infallible act of a canonization. Indeed, Pius XII is said to have considered this canonization to be one of the most important acts of his pontificate. Hence, the fact that the Holy Father was so adamant in performing this canonization despite his ill health - even if it should be the last public act of his life! - demonstrates the heroic charity of the Holy Father for the souls under his care, and those of later generations, by protecting them against the pernicious errors of modernism and religious indifferentism.

Without further ado, I provide below an account of the events surrounding the canonization of Pius X on May 29, 1954, from an article in the "Angelus" publication:

"In May, Pius XII was a little better; but barely. Still, he was utterly determined to perform a most arduous two-day ceremony in which were combined love and duty. It was an act he felt to be one of the most important of his Pontificate: the canonization of Saint Pius X.

 

The saintly Pope had died forty years before, just as the guns of August, 1914 were overwhelming Europe. And a young Msgr. Eugenio Pacelli, working under Rafael Cardinal Merry del Val, the Papal Secretary of State, had caught the eye of the saintly Pontiff. In fact, when the Catholic University of America in 1911 invited Pacelli to come to Washington, D.C. to teach in the Chair of Roman Law, Pacelli was only 35 years old. Both the Pope and his close friend, the Cardinal-Secretary of State, said they could not spare him.

 

Indeed, as July turned to that terrible August of 1914, St. Pius X received in audience, the Ambassador of the Austro-Hungarian Empire who wanted the Pope to bless his country's armies, in which there were so many Catholics, in the coming struggle. Standing on either side of the Papal throne were Cardinal Merry del Val and Msgr. Pacelli. Pius X had clearly prophesied a general European war just the year before, saying it would break out in 1914. And now this! The saintly Pontiff was frail at 79, but he came to sudden life at the Ambassador's suggestion. His knuckles turned white, his blue eyes blazed, his voice resounded throughout the Hall of Audiences: "I bless peace; not war!" Then he arose and tottered out of the hall on Msgr. Pacelli's arm. It was something Pius XII never forgot. Just three weeks later, St. Pius X died, on August 20th, 1914 in the odor of sanctity.

 

The life of the peasant Pope had been rigorously examined. When his coffin was opened in 1944, his body was found to be incorrupt. He was beatified by Pius XII in 1951. His two miracles of healing had been attested, and the conclusion had been affirmed that Pius X was indeed worthy of being canonized. Pius XII had determined that now was the time to canonize one who had always considered himself "unworthy".

 

The Pope's doctor was horrified! How could his patient possibly find the superhuman strength to go through two days of such arduous ceremony and with the heavy Tiara on his head? But a resolute Pius XII could not be dissuaded. Even if it were the last act of his life, this was something he must do! And since it was still worth the doing, God would give him the strength.

 

Pope Pius XII canonized St. Pius X on May 29, 1954.

The great day came: May 29, 1954. The ceremony had to be held in St. Peter's Square, so great was the throng. It took a full hour for the Pope just to be vested! This itself was a small miracle, as he sometimes swayed from fatigue. Surrounded by Cardinals, he prayed for some time in the Sistine Chapel. According to ritual, he was twice asked by Amleto Cardinal Cicognani to declare Pius X a saint. He made no reply, but intoned the Ave Maria Stella.

 

Now the Pope mounted the sedia gestatoria, and was carried in procession through the great throng in St. Peter's Square. Ahead of him were hundreds of prelates; from simple monks and priests, to cardinals. Then came the Swiss Guards, swords flashing in the brilliant sunlight, followed by the Noble Guard in golden helmets.

 

As the Pope reached the basilica's high door, Cardinal Cicognani asked a third time that Pius X be declared a saint. And this time Pius XII indicated, "Yes". The Pope was then enthroned on the terrace before the central door of St. Peter's.

Pius XII never talked about the stress he endured during that long ceremony, or the faintness that at times threatened to overcome him. His doctor, close at hand, had to give him restoratives on occasion. But the weak Pope's voice was clear and resonant as he sang Oremus, and read the decree of canonization. And he sounded no less full-throated later, when he praised St. Pius X in his panegyric.

 

Day two was equally arduous and impressive! The Mass of Canonization was celebrated inside the basilica. St. Peter's was filled to capacity; 100,000 people. And again, the frail and very ill Pope took full part in the ceremony. Who could have guessed how ill he was? For in his glittering vestments he seemed as strong as ever; remaining erect with the Triple Crown on his head.

At the end, the silver trumpets sounded the signal for departure. The bearers turned, and Pius XII gave a final blessing to the vast throng. With the help of God, and St. Pius X, the spirit had triumphed over failing flesh."

 

I will end by providing a video with some interesting images from the canonization ceremony. How glorious Catholicism during Pius XII's reign appears upon viewing such videos of his pontificate!

 

 

September 3, Feast of Pope St Pius X: "Instaurare Omnia in Christo" - Restore All Things in Christ

On May 29, 1954, during the Marian Holy Year instituted by the Holy Father Pope Pius XII, in the midst of a great illness (more about that in tomorrow's post, so stay tuned), with heroic effort due to his resulting weakness, and with great joy for the Universal Church, the Pontiff raised Pope Pius X to the glory of the altars (see here for his canonization address). Pope St Pius X was the great adversary against modernism who is attributed as saying when criticized for being too harsh against the modernists, "Kindness is for fools! They want them to be treated with oil, soap, and caresses but they ought to be beaten with fists! In a duel you don’t count or measure the blows, you strike as you can! War is not made with charity, it is a struggle a duel. If Our Lord were not terrible he would not have given an example in this too. See how he treated the Philistines, the sowers of error, the wolves in sheep’s clothing, the traitors in the temple. He scourged them with whips!"

 

 

The papal motto of Pope St Pius X was "Instaurare Omnia in Christo" - Restore All Things in Christ, and on this basis he penned his first encyclical (see here), E Supremi, October 4, 1903 outlying the plan of his pontificate for this purpose, which was also a warning against the dangers facing mankind as a result of apostasy from God. Below are some of the highlights from the encyclical: 

 

"...In truth reasons both numerous and most weighty were not lacking to justify this resistance of Ours. For, beside the fact that We deemed Ourselves altogether unworthy through Our littleness of the honor of the Pontificate; who would not have been disturbed at seeing himself designated to succeed him who, ruling the Church with supreme wisdom for nearly twenty-six years, showed himself adorned with such sublimity of mind, such luster of every virtue. as to attract to himself the admiration even of adversaries, and to leave his memory stamped in glorious achievements. Then again, to omit other motives, We were terrified beyond all else by the disastrous state of human society today. For who can fail to see that society is at the present time, more than in any past age, suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction? You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is -- apostasy from God, than which in truth nothing is more allied with ruin, according to the word of the Prophet: "For behold they that go far from Thee shall perish" (Ps. 1xxii., 17). We saw therefore that, in virtue of the ministry of the Pontificate, which was to be entrusted to Us, We must hasten to find a remedy for this great evil, considering as addressed to Us that Divine command: "Lo, I have set thee this day over the nations and over kingdoms, to root up, and to pull down, and to waste, and to destroy, and to build, and to plant" (Jerem. i., 10). But, cognizant of Our weakness, We recoiled in terror from a task as urgent as it is arduous."

 

Since, however, it has been pleasing to the Divine Will to raise Our lowliness to such sublimity of power, We take courage in Him who strengthens Us; and setting Ourselves to work, relying on the power of God, We proclaim that We have no other program in the Supreme Pontificate but that "of restoring all things in Christ" (Ephes. i., 10), so that "Christ may be all and in all" (Coloss. iii., 2). The interests of God shall be Our interest, and for these We are resolved to spend all Our strength and Our very life. Hence, should anyone ask Us for a symbol as the expression of Our will, We will give this and no other: "To renew all things in Christ." In undertaking this glorious task, We are greatly quickened by the certainty that We shall have all of you, Venerable Brethren, as generous co-operators. Did We doubt it We should have to regard you, unjustly, as either unconscious or heedless of that sacrilegious war which is now, almost everywhere, stirred up and fomented against God. For in truth, "The nations have raged and the peoples imagined vain things" (Ps. ii., 1.) against their Creator, so frequent is the cry of the enemies of God: "Depart from us" (Job. xxi., 14). And as might be expected we find extinguished among the majority of men all respect for the Eternal God, and no regard paid in the manifestations of public and private life to the Supreme Will -- nay, every effort and every artifice is used to destroy utterly the memory and the knowledge of God.

 

When all this is considered there is good reason to fear lest this great perversity may be as it were a foretaste, and perhaps the beginning of those evils which are reserved for the last days; and that there may be already in the world the "Son of Perdition" of whom the Apostle speaks (II. Thess. ii., 3). Such, in truth, is the audacity and the wrath employed everywhere in persecuting religion, in combating the dogmas of the faith, in brazen effort to uproot and destroy all relations between man and the Divinity! While, on the other hand, and this according to the same apostle is the distinguishing mark of Antichrist, man has with infinite temerity put himself in the place of God, raising himself above all that is called God; in such wise that although he cannot utterly extinguish in himself all knowledge of God, he has contemned God's majesty and, as it were, made of the universe a temple wherein he himself is to be adored. "He sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself as if he were God" (II. Thess. ii., 2).

 

...Now the way to reach Christ is not hard to find: it is the Church. Rightly does Chrysostom inculcate: "The Church is thy hope, the Church is thy salvation, the Church is thy refuge." ("Hom. de capto Euthropio," n. 6.) It was for this that Christ founded it, gaining it at the price of His blood, and made it the depositary of His doctrine and His laws, bestowing upon it at the same time an inexhaustible treasury of graces for the sanctification and salvation of men.

 

You see, then, Venerable Brethren, the duty that has been imposed alike upon Us and upon you of bringing back to the discipline of the Church human society, now estranged from the wisdom of Christ; the Church will then subject it to Christ, and Christ to God. If We, through the goodness of God Himself, bring this task to a happy issue, We shall be rejoiced to see evil giving place to good, and hear, for our gladness, "a loud voice from heaven saying: Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God and the power of his Christ." (Apoc. xii., 10.) But if our desire to obtain this is to be fulfilled, we must use every means and exert all our energy to bring about the utter disappearance of the enormous and detestable wickedness, so characteristic of our time -- the substitution of man for God; this done, it remains to restore to their ancient place of honor the most holy laws and counsels of the gospel; to proclaim aloud the truths taught by the Church, and her teachings on the sanctity of marriage, on the education and discipline of youth, on the possession and use of property, the duties that men owe to those who rule the State; and lastly to restore equilibrium between the different classes of society according to Christian precept and custom...

May God, "who is rich in mercy" (Ephes. ii., 4), benignly speed this restoration of the human race in Jesus Christ for "it is not of him that willeth, or of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy" (Rom. ix., 16). And let us, Venerable Brethren, "in the spirit of humility" (Dan. iii., 39), with continuous and urgent prayer ask this of Him through the merits of Jesus Christ. Let us turn, too, to the most powerful intercession of the Divine Mother -- to obtain which We, addressing to you this Letter of Ours on the day appointed especially for commemorating the Holy Rosary, ordain and confirm all Our Predecessor's prescriptions with regard to the dedication of the present month to the august Virgin, by the public recitation of the Rosary in all churches; with the further exhortation that as intercessors with God appeal be also made to the most pure Spouse of Mary, the Patron of the Catholic Church, and the holy Princes of the Apostles, Peter and Paul..."

Address of Pope Pius XII following the canonization of Pope Pius X, May 29, 1954

Today is the vigil of the feast of Pope St Pius X (September 3rd) according to the traditional liturgical calendar, and in the next few days in honor of this great saint I will be posting articles dealing with the legacy of some of his most important writings, which generally deal with the most pernicious evils of his day (and which indeed still plague the modern day Catholic Church): modernism and religious indifferentism. To put things in perspective of the extreme concern with which he viewed the events of his own day consider that he was even afraid the "Son of Perdition" (the Anti-Christ) might already have been alive at the beginning of his pontificate!

“Who can fail to see that society is at the present time, more than in any past age, suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction? You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is—apostasy from God… When all this is considered there is good reason to fear lest this great perversity may be as it were a foretaste, and perhaps the beginning of those evils which are reserved for the last days; and that there may be already in the world the ‘Son of Perdition’ [Antichrist] of whom the Apostle speaks.” (E Supremi, Encyclical on "The Restoration Of All Things in Christ", October 4, 1903)

What would Pope St Pius X think of the present day calamitous situation?

In order to gain a greater appreciation of this great saint, I present the address of Pope Pius XII following the canonization of Pope Pius X, on May 29, 1954" (source):

 "This hour of splendid triumph which God, Who lifts up the lowly, has arranged and as it were hastened in order to set His seal on the marvelous elevation of His faithful servant Pius X in the supreme glory of the altars, fills Our heart with joy, a joy in which you, Venerable Brothers and Beloved Sons, share abundantly by your presence here. We offer heartfelt thanks then to God in His goodness for allowing Us to take part in this extraordinary event; all the more so since, for perhaps the first time in the history of the Church, the formal canonization of a Pope is proclaimed by one who had the privilege of serving him in the Roman Curia.

This day is blessed and memorable, not only for Us, who count it among the happiest days of Our pontificate, to which Providence has allotted so many sorrows and cares, but also for the entire Church, which, gathered around Us in spirit, rejoices all together in a great thrill of religious feeling.

 

This wonderful evening the endearing name of Pius X, pronounced in the most diverse accents, spans the whole earth; it resounds in enduring testimony to the fruitful presence of Christ in His Church, by evoking everywhere aspirations to sanctity, great graces of faith, of purity, of devotion to the Holy Eucharist. God, Who rewards with liberality, bears witness to His servant’s lofty sanctity in exalting him. It was this sanctity, even more than the supreme Office he held, that made Pius X an outstanding hero of the Church, and as such today the Saint raised up by Providence for our times.

 

Now it is precisely in this light that We wish you to contemplate the gigantic and yet humble figure of the holy Pope, so that when the shadows of this memorable day fall and the cries of the immense hosanna fade away, the solemn rite of his canonization may linger to bless your souls and help in saving the world.

 

1. He solemnly announced the programme of his pontificate in his very first Encyclical (E supremi of Oct. 4, 1903) in which he declared that his only aim was “to re-establish all things in Christ” (Eph. 1:10), that is, to sum up, to restore all things to unity in Christ. But where is the road that leads to Christ, he asked himself, looking in compassion at the hesitating, wandering souls of his time. The answer, valid yesterday as well as today and always, is: the Church! His primary aim then, unceasingly pursued till death, was to make the Church ever more effectually suitable and ready to receive the movement of souls toward Jesus Christ. With this aim, he conceived the bold undertaking of recasting the body of church law in such wise as to give the Church a more ordered life, greater certainty and flexibility of movement, such, as was demanded by an age typified by growing dynamism and complexity. It is surely true that this work, which he himself called “truly an arduous task,” was consonant with his eminent practical sense and the vigour of his character. Nevertheless the ultimate reason for his undertaking this difficult task is not, it seems, to be found only in the temperament of the man. The well-spring of the legislative work of Pius X is to be looked for above all in his personal sanctity, in his profound personal conviction that the reality of God, which he experienced in a life of constant union, is the source and basis of all order, all justice, all law on earth. Where God is, there is order, justice and law; and conversely, all just order safeguarded by law manifests the existence of God. But what institution here below ought to demonstrate this relationship between God and law more clearly than the Church, the mystical body of Christ Himself? God has blessed abundantly this work of the Holy Pontiff, so that the Code of canon law will remain for future ages the great monument of his pontificate and he himself will justly be hailed the providential Saint of our age.

 

Would that this spirit of justice and law, which Pius X gave witness to and exemplified for the modern world, could penetrate the conference halls of nations, where the most serious problems affecting the whole human family are discussed, particularly the method of banishing forever the fear of terrifying cataclysms and of guaranteeing for all peoples a lasting happy era of tranquility and peace.

 

2. In the second of his distinguished accomplishments Pius X is revealed as the indomitable champion of the Church and the providential Saint of our times. In sometimes dramatic circumstances this accomplishment resembled the struggle of a giant in defence of a priceless treasure: the internal unity of the Church in her innermost foundation, the faith. Even from his childhood years Divine Providence was preparing the Saint in his humble family, built upon authority, good habits, and the exact practice of the faith. No doubt every other Pontiff would by virtue of the grace of state have fought and repulsed the assaults which were aimed at the very foundation of the Church. But we must recognize that the perspicuity and strength with which Pius X carried on the victorious struggle against the errors of Modernism, testify to the heroic degree with which the virtue of faith burned in his saintly heart. Uniquely concerned that the inheritance of God be preserved intact for the flock confided to his care, the great Pontiff knew no weakness when dealing with persons of dignity or authority; nor did he manifest vacillation when confronted with alluring but false doctrines within or without the Church; nor did he betray fear lest he bring upon himself personal affronts and unjust interpretations of his pure intentions. He had the clear conviction that he was fighting for the most holy cause of God and souls. The words which the Lord addressed to the Apostle Peter are literally verified in him: “I have prayed for you, that your faith fail not, and you...will confirm your brethren” (Luke 22:32)...The subject then under consideration, namely, the preservation of the close alliance between faith and science, is so noble a good for all humanity, that this second great achievement of the saintly Pontiff exercises a notable influence even beyond the Catholic world.

Any theory, such as Modernism, which separates faith and science in their source and in their object by opposing one to the other, produces in these two vital areas a schism which is so pernicious “that a little is more than death.” This consequence has been actually observed. Man, who at the turn of the century was already divided within himself and yet labouring under the delusion that he possessed his unity under the shallow appearances of harmony and happiness, based upon a purely earthly progress, seemed to be rent asunder under the impact of a reality which was far different.

 

With watchful gaze Pius X observed the advent of this spiritual calamity of the modern world, this bitter delusion which especially affected the cultured classes. He perceived how such an apparent faith, that is, a faith not founded upon the revelation of God, but rooted in a purely human soil, would lure many into atheism. Likewise he recognized the fatal destiny of a science, which contrary to nature and in voluntary limitation, interdicted the way to absolute Truth and Good, leaving to man, deprived of God and confronted with the invisible obscurity in which he found all being clothed, only the attitude of anguish or arrogance.

 

The Saint met this deadly evil with the only possible real salvation: Catholic and Biblical truth, the truth of faith, accepted as “reasonable service” (Rom. 12:1) towards God and His revelation. By thus coordinating faith and science, faith as the supernatural extension and at times confirmation of science, and science as the way which leads to faith, Pius X restored to Christians unity and peace of soul, which are the inviolable premises of life...

3. Sanctity, which was the inspiration and directing force of the aforementioned undertaking of Pius X, is still more clearly discernible in his personal life. Before applying it to others, he put into practice in his own life his programme of unifying all things in Christ. First as a humble parish priest, then as bishop, and finally as Supreme Pontiff he was intimately convinced that the sanctity to which God called him was priestly sanctity. For what sanctity is more pleasing to God in a priest of the New Law than that which belongs to him as representative of Jesus Christ, Eternal High Priest, Who left to His Church in the holy Sacrifice of the Mass a memorial for all time and a perpetual renovation of His Sacrifice on the Cross, until He shall come for the last judgment (I Cor. 11:24-26); and Who in the Sacrament of the Blessed Eucharist has given Himself as the food of the soul: “He that eateth this bread shall live forever” (John 6:58).

 

A Priest, above all in the Eucharistic ministry: this is the most faithful portrayal of St. Pius X. To serve the mystery of the Blessed Eucharist as a priest, and to fulfill the command of Our Saviour “Do this for a commemoration of Me” (Luke 22:19), was his goal. From the day of his sacred ordination until his death as Pope, he knew no other path than this in order to arrive at heroism in his love of God and to make a wholehearted return to that Redeemer of the world, Who by means of the Blessed Eucharist poured out the wealth of His divine Love on men (Council of Trent, Sess. XIII, chap. 2). One of the most expressive proofs of his consciousness of his priesthood was the extreme care he took to renew the dignity of divine worship. Overcoming the prejudices springing from an erroneous practice, he resolutely promoted frequent, and even daily, Communion of the faithful, and unhesitatingly led children to the banquet of the Lord, and offered them to the embrace of the God hidden on the altars. Then, the Spouse of Christ experienced a new Springtime of Eucharistic life.

 

In the profound vision which he had of the Church as a Society, Pius X recognized that it was the Blessed Eucharist which had the power to nourish its intimate life substantially, and to raise it high above all other human societies. Only the Eucharist, in which God gives Himself to man, is apt to lay the foundations of a social life worthy of those who live it, cemented more by love than by authority, rich in activity and aimed at the perfection of the individual: a life that is “hidden with Christ in God.”

 

What a providential example for the world of today, where earthly society is becoming more and more a mystery to itself, and is feverishly trying to rediscover its soul! Let it look, then, for its model at the Church, gathered around its altars. There in the sacrament of the Eucharist mankind really discovers and recognizes that its past, present, and future are a unity in Christ (cf. Council of Trent, l.c.)...Only in the Church, the holy Pontiff seems to repeat, and for her in the Blessed Eucharist which is ‘‘life hidden with Christ in God,” is to be found the secret and source of renewed social life.

 

Hence follows the grave responsibility of ministers of the altar whose duty it is to disclose to souls the saving treasure of the Eucharist. Many indeed are the activities which a priest can exercise for the salvation of the modern world; one of them, and undoubtedly the most efficacious, and the most lasting in its effects, is to act as dispenser of the Holy Eucharist, after first nourishing himself abundantly with It. His work would cease to be sacerdotal, if, even through zeal for souls, he were to put his Eucharistic vocation in a secondary place. Let priests conform their outlook to the inspired wisdom of Pius X, and let them confidently exercise their whole apostolate under the sign of the Blessed Eucharist.

 

Similarly let religious men and women, those who live under the same roof as Jesus Christ and are daily nourished with His body, take as a safe norm in the pursuit of the sanctity proper to their state, what the holy Pontiff once declared on an important occasion, namely, that the bonds which through their vows and community life link them with God are not to be subordinated to any other activity, however legitimate, for the good of their neighbour (cf. Letter to Gabriel Marie, Superior General of the Christian Brothers, 23 April, 1905—Pii X P. M. Act, II, 87 f.).

 

In the Blessed Eucharist the soul should strike roots for nourishing the interior life, which is not only a fundamental treasure of all souls consecrated to the Lord, hut also a necessity for every Christian, whom God calls to be saved...

 

The Holy Eucharist and the interior life: this is the supreme and universal lesson which Pius X, from the height of glory, teaches in this hour to all souls. As apostle of the interior life, he becomes, in the age of the machine, of technology, and of organization, the Saint and guide of men of our time.

Saint Pius X, glory of the priesthood, light and honour of the Christian people, you in whom lowliness seemed blended with greatness, severity with mildness, simple piety with profound learning; you, Pope of the Holy Eucharist and of the catechism, of unsullied faith and fearless strength, turn your gaze on holy Church, which you so loved and to which you consecrated the choicest of those treasures with which the lavish hand of the Divine Bounty had enriched your soul; obtain for her safety and steadfastness amid the difficulties and persecutions of our times; sustain this poor human race, whose sufferings you shared in so largely, those sufferings which at the end stilled the beating of your great heart; bring it about that this troubled world witness the triumph of that peace which should mean harmony among nations, brotherly accord and sincere collaboration among the different classes of society, love and charity among individual men, so that thus those ardent desires which consumed your apostolic life may become by your intercession a blessed reality, to the glory of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who with the Father and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns forever and ever, Amen!"