Today we celebrate Pope St. Pius X, and, because of him, we have the Traditional Mass continuing. This is due to him and Ecclesia Dei (the group of priests in the Chicago area who fought to have the Mass to be said in Latin after Msgr. Lebevre consecrated the Bishops, thus earning him the wrongly imposed excommunication). These priests were also instrumental in preserving the Mass of Time Immoral in the U.S.. From Pius X we learn again that 'the folly of the Cross', simplicity of life, and humility of heart, are still the indispensable conditions of a perfect Christian life.
The Pastoral Career of Pope St. Pius X Giuseppe Melchiore, the oldest of eight surviving children, was born to Giambattista and Margherita Sarto on June 2, 1836 in Riese, a town lying in the Venetian plain. Giambattista was employed as a cursore, a minor village official in the Austrian administration, for Venetia was then under the political control of the Austrian Empire. In time, he was confirmed and then made his First Communion. While attending the College of Castelfranco, about seven kilometers from Riese, 'Beppi' displayed his academic excellence. In his eight examinations over the four years, Sarto always held the first place. Devoted to the Blessed Sacrament and the Virgin Mary, he also grew in piety. It came as no surprise that he was considering a priestly vocation.
The Sarto family was not in a position to finance Giuseppe’s seminary studies. Providentially, he was awarded a scholarship at the Seminary of Padua, one of the very best in all of Italy. While studying there he was especially drawn to the study of Scripture, the Fathers, scholastic philosophy, as well as sacred music. In time, he was ordained at Castelfranco on September 18, 1858 by the Bishop of Treviso, Msgr. Zinelli. As his first assignment, Don Giuseppe worked as curate in Tombolo, assisting the pastor, Don Antonio Constantini. Under the gentle hand of Don Antonio, Sarto learned how to preach in the plain and simple style which was so effective with the people, and which he would encourage his own priests to utilize later. After an apprenticeship of less than ten years, Don Giuseppe was named the pastor of Salzano in 1867. Here he instituted classes on Christian doctrine for both children and adults. At Salzano, he first formed a schola cantorum of men and boys at the church to sing Gregorian music.
Greatly pleased with the fine work of Don Sarto as a parish priest, Msgr. Zinelli, in April of 1875, called on the priest to take up more important duties in Treviso. He was not only appointed canon of the cathedral and chancellor of the diocese, but also spiritual director at the seminary. Seeing that the spiritual formation of Treviso’s future priests was his charge, he put heart and soul into this work. As the health of both the bishop and vicar general declined, the lion’s share of the diocesan administrative work devolved upon Sarto. In this way, he was initiated into running a diocese well before he was named bishop. In September of 1884 he received a letter appointing him Bishop of Mantua. He was genuinely disconcerted and did not think himself equal the task. Yet, he submitted. After a time of preparation, he traveled to Rome and was consecrated bishop on November 16.
Rome regarded Mantua as a serious trouble spot, where the state of the clergy was perilous. Mgsr. Sarto could not take possession of his diocese until April 1885, when he received the royal exequatur, the government’s authorization of his episcopal appointment. Early on, the young bishop focused his attentions on improving the spiritual life, the academic rigor, and the discipline in the seminary as the means of the future restoration of the clergy. As a means of rejuvenating the spiritual life of the Mantuans, he held two pastoral visitations and a diocesan synod. In May of 1893, on account of his fine management of a problematic diocese, Leo XIII appointed Mgsr. Sarto to the Patriarchate of Venice.
After Sarto arrived in Rome in early June, he met with Pope Leo XIII (he has to be another saint), who, in a secret consistory, created him cardinal and then publicly nominated him to the patriarchal see of Venice. Yet once again, Cardinal Sarto had to wait till November of 1894 to enter his see, for the exequatur arrived well over a year later. Finally, on November 24 the people of Venice provided their new patriarch with a grand welcome. Having pronounced, “There is too much preaching and too little teaching”, he directed his priests to avoid flowery language and to preach the truths of the Gospel in a straightforward and simple style, noting that the eternal salvation of their flocks should be their focus. While in Venice, Cardinal Sarto brought about a reform of church music. In Venice, Sarto also exhorted the faithful to frequent communion, and even began to encourage young children to communicate. Many of his papal musical and Eucharistic reforms found their origin in his Venetian experience.
At the venerable age of 93, Pope Leo XIII died on July 20, 1903. The Conclave opened on July 31. The favorite going into the conclave was Cardinal Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro, the former Secretary of State for Leo XIII. As Rampolla closed in on 50% of the votes, Cardinal Puzyna, Bishop of Cracow exercised, in the name of the Emperor Franz Josef, the veto of exclusion (ius exclusivae) against Rampolla. After the fourth scrutiny, Cardinal Sarto began to make significant gains, amassing a clear 2/3 majority in the seventh scrutiny. He could see this coming. At first, he was unwilling. Nevertheless, after it became clear that this was the will of God for him, he accepted the burden, taking the name Pius in honor of the great popes who recently suffered so much. Next year, in the Constitution 'Commissum Nobis' (1904), Pope Pius X abolished the veto and threatened any cardinal who attempted to exercise it with excommunication. His first great reform, then, involved papal elections themselves. After a period of discernment, he chose Raphael Merry del Val, a gifted linguist with a cosmopolitan background, as his Secretary of State. (We need another one like him these days)
The Reforms of Pius X In his opening encyclical, 'E Supremi apostolatus' (1903), Pius X claims that the program for his pontificate is "instaurare omnia in Christo" ,“to reestablish all things in Christ” (Eph 1:10), so that “Christ may be all things and in all.” To his fellow bishops, he states that all other tasks must yield to “forming the clergy to holiness.” For that reason the Bishops’ seminaries must be the “delight of their hearts.” Pius knew that this poison must be eradicated. "Rest assured, Venerable Brethren," Pius wrote, "that we on our side will use the greatest diligence to prevent the members of the clergy from being drawn to the snares of a new and fallacious science, which savors not of Christ, but with masked and cunning argument, strives to open the doors to the errors of rationalism and semi-rationalism." He had specific reform plans for the seminaries, including residency requirements, discipline and curricula. Within a few years of his pontificate, he issued the Apostolic Letter 'Quoniam in Re Biblica' (1906), in which he outlined a systematic program for biblical instruction in seminaries. Among other things, he maintained that a course in sacred scripture should be incorporated into each seminary year. Shortly before his death, in the wake of the Modernist controversy, he issued the 'Motu proprio Doctoris Angelici' (1914), in which he manifestly insisted on Thomistic philosophy being the foundation of theological studies in all Catholic educational institutions.
More than anything else, it was Pius X’s reforms on the Eucharist which had the greatest impact on the daily lives of Catholics. At that time, many people only received communion three or four times a year. With his decree Sacra 'Tridentina Synodus' (1905), Pius placed the last nail in the coffin of Jansenism, by promoting frequent and daily communion. He stated that Holy Communion was not a reward for good behavior but, as the Council of Trent noted, it is “the antidote whereby we may be freed from daily faults and be preserved from mortal sins.” In his decree 'Quam singulari' (1910), the pope laid out guidelines on the age of children who are to be admitted to Holy Communion. Pius said, “The age of discretion for receiving Holy Communion is that at which the child knows the difference between the Eucharistic Bread and ordinary, material bread, and can therefore approach the altar with proper devotion.” In the past children, or better adolescents, received their first communion when they were between the ages of 12-14; now they might be as young as 7.
Concerning sacred music, Pius issued the 'Motu proprio Tra le Sollecitudini' (1903). In the opening of this document, Pius declares, “Nothing should have place, therefore, in the temple…which is thus unworthy of the House of Prayer and of the Majesty of God.” Among those things designated antithetical to sacred music, he lists the use of the piano, percussion instruments, female singers, the theatrical style, and any form of profane music. (How much of this nonsense do we hear today?) The organ, however, was to be allowed. He mentions that the proper aim of sacred music is “to add greater efficacy to the [liturgical] text, in order that through it the faithful may be the more easily moved to devotion and better disposed for the reception of the fruits of grace belonging to the celebration of the most holy mysteries.” On that account, he mentions that Gregorian chant is the supreme model of sacred music, closely followed by classical polyphony, especially that of Palestrina. As a means of establishing these reforms throughout the universal church, Pius established an institute of sacred music (1911) in Rome for the purpose of training teachers of chant. (It would also be nice if the congregation got to sing hymns now and then, instead of just the choir. For example, at our church the choir sings versions of the Gloria and the Credo that nobody can follow along with, except for maybe two. The edification of God is supposed to be for ALL of us, NOT just for the choir. Just sayin')
Since he was a seminary student, Pius particularly enjoyed the study sacred scripture. Moreover, following the wishes of Trent, Pius was interested in a critical edition of the Vulgate. As this would be a long-term, multi-generational task, involving the study and comparison of various manuscripts, Pius placed the revision of the Vulgate in the able hands of the Benedictines. In order to further promote biblical studies, a plan both of his and his predecessor, Pius founded the Pontifical Biblical Institute in 1909 to train professors of sacred scripture. This was put in the competent hands of the Jesuits.
Following upon the wishes of the Fathers of the First Vatican Council, Pius took steps to reform the breviary in his Apostolic Constitution 'Divini Afflatu' (1911), the first major reform since the time of St. Pope Pius V in 1568. In his day the multiplication of the offices of the saints made it difficult to fulfill the duty of reciting all 150 psalms every week. Aims of the this reform included: Completion of the entire Psalter every week, reduction of the length of the liturgical offices, restoring Sundays and ferial days to their rightful place, and the lessons of Sacred Scripture were to be restored to their proper season.
The Roman Curia had last been thoroughly reorganized by the energetic Sixtus V in 1587. At that time the Curia also governed the Papal States. Nevertheless, many important changes had occurred in the intervening 300 years, not the least of which was the loss of the Papal States. With the Curia now needing to be streamlined and modernized, Pius, with a facility for administration and organization, instituted reforms in the congregations, tribunals, and offices of the Curia through his Apostolic Constitution 'Sapienti Consilio' (1908). With the pope himself, Cardinal Gaetano de Lai would oversee this reform. Among other things, he reduced the number of congregations from fifteen to eleven and clearly laid out each of their duties. Furthermore, he removed the U.S., Canada, Newfoundland, England, Ireland, Holland, and Luxembourg from the authority of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide.
In the preparatory phase of the First Vatican Council, many of the bishops had requested that the canon law of the Church be codified. Not long after his election, in his 'Motu proprio, Arduum Sane Munus' (1904) Pius X announced his plan for codifying the canon law. As the name of the document suggests, it was a “truly difficult task.” He placed Pietro Gasparri, a canonist with amazing energy and perseverance, over this herculean project. Pius drew on the bishops throughout the entire Church as consultants in this undertaking. Some of these laws were no longer relevant, some had varying authority, and other needed to be adapted to modern life. This simplification, streamlining and codification of canon law were indispensable to the growing modern Church. Much of the work was completed before the death of Pius, but it was his successor Benedict who actually promulgated the Code in 1917. As Owen Chadwick remarks, “It took canon law out of the mysterious realm of the experts and made it available to diocesan administrators.”
From his earliest years as a priest through his succeeding years as a bishop, the catechesis of both children and adults was close to the heart of the pontiff. He had implemented it everywhere he went. Therefore, 'Acerbo nimis' (1905), Pius’ encyclical on teaching Christian doctrine was a natural choice for one of his earliest encyclicals. Toward the beginning of the encyclical, Pius notes that many Christians are completely ignorant of the “truths necessary for salvation.” He notes this concerns not only the masses, but also many people who are, otherwise, well-educated in secular pursuits. Furthermore, he also stresses the essential duty of priests to teach the faith to the young. He commands, “On every Sunday and holy day, with no exception, throughout the year, all parish priests and in general all those having the care of souls, shall instruct the boys and girls, for the space of an hour from the text of the Catechism on those things they must believe and do in order to attain salvation.” Even when he was pope, he made time to teach the catechism to the children in the courtyard of San Damaso in the Vatican.
Death, Beatification, and CanonizationAs the Great War (I) began to unravel in late July, 1914, the pope’s health deteriorated. He was extremely sorrowful at the prospect of such a vast war. According to his doctor, before he died, he said, “I am offering my miserable life as a holocaust to prevent the massacre of so many of my children.” In the early morning of August 20, 1914, with the names of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph on his lips, he breathed his last. On August 20, 1914, Pope Pius X passed to eternal life. The Italian press wrote, “ Saint Is Dead." On his tombstone are the words: “Pope Pius X, poor and yet rich, gentle and humble of heart, unconquerable champion of the Catholic Faith, whose constant endeavor it was to renew all things in Christ...” His last will and testament was read shortly after his death and his words succinctly epitomized St. Anthony's influence as well as all that Pope Pius X believed and stood for: "I was born poor, I lived in poverty, I wish to die poor." In his will he stated that he wanted to be buried in St. Peters and he did not want his body embalmed. In 1944, when his body was exhumed, it was found “excellently preserved.” Pius X was beatified by Pope Pius XII on Sept. 3, 1950 and he was canonized on May 29, 1954 by that same pope.
Pope St. Pius X passed through the ecclesiastical cursus honorum, step by step, bringing a wealth of pastoral experience to his papacy as few other popes ever could claim. He held the positions of curate, pastor, canon, spiritual director at the seminary, diocesan chancellor, bishop, metropolitan, cardinal, and pope. His practical experience in overseeing three important Italian episcopal sees provided him with a keen appreciation of pastoral needs. Furthermore, this pope, who held office for only eleven years, ranks as one of the greatest reforming popes in history, certainly the greatest since the Council of Trent. If any modern pope should be called the “Great”, Pius, on account of his holiness and his comprehensive and beneficial reforms, let alone his courageous and firm defense of the faith and rights of the church, surely has the first claim.
*Of course, everything he did during his papacy has been overruled by the 'modernists', who are still around and more powerful than ever. The priests back then had to take the 'Oath Against Modernism', to help them fight against this 'synthesis of all heresies'. Today, this is never said except maybe by the Society with his name. Pius X wanted all to follow the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas. This is also not done these days. "It's too tedious and exacting." No great wonder why we're in the state we're in!
"Our duty," says Father Newman, "is to follow the Vicar of Christ wherever he goes and never to desert him, whatever the cost, but to defend him from all hazards and against all comers, as a son would a father, knowing that his cause is always the cause of God."
I wish we could, in good conscience, do this today. The 'hazards' to the salvation of souls are now within the walls. We are all in a battle with the devil over souls. We, the laity, must keep up the 'good fight' with the Faith of our Fathers that is within us to conquer.
Pius knew that if he did not protect the flock from poisonous doctrine, if he allowed heretical priests to pervert the minds of Catholics, if he left the flock at the mercy of apostate teachers who operate freely inside of the Church, that God would hold him accountable for his dereliction of duty, and that he, the Pope himself, would lose his soul.
I will end with words from Dante, who wrote 'THE DIVINE COMEDY' , where he visits hell, purgatory, and heaven.
"The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in a period of moral crisis, maintained their neutrality."
As a note, I will put the 'Oath against Modernism' Here it is. This isn't even thought of anymore in the post Vat. II church. Someone will pay eventually.
THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM
Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.
To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries. (Like this has happened since, seeing what is in this Oath, and DEFINITELY NOT since Vat. II)
I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:19), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.
Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historical-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.
Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.
I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God.
Following are some statements from an Encyclical 'Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio', written by Pope Pius XI in 1922. You can get all Encyclicals at, papalencyclicals.net, if you want to read them or to copy them. What follows makes you think: Does ANYTHING ever change?
"...No less well known are the words of the Divine Teacher, Jesus Christ, Who said: "Without me you can do nothing" (John xv, 5) and again, "He that gathereth not with me, scattereth." (Luke xi, 23)
These words of the Holy Bible have been fulfilled and are now at this very moment being fulfilled before our very eyes. Because men have forsaken God and Jesus Christ, they have sunk to the depths of evil. They waste their energies and consume their time and efforts in vain sterile attempts to find a remedy for these ills, but without even being successful in saving what little remains from the existing ruin. It was a quite general desire that both our laws and our governments should exist without recognizing God or Jesus Christ, on the theory that all authority comes from men, not from God. Because of such an assumption, these theorists fell very short of being able to bestow upon law not only those sanctions which it must possess but also that secure basis for the supreme criterion of justice which even a pagan philosopher like Cicero saw clearly could not be derived except from the divine law.
Authority itself lost its hold upon mankind, for it had lost that sound and unquestionable justification for its right to command on the one hand and to be obeyed on the other. Society, quite logically and inevitably, was shaken to its very depths and even threatened with destruction, since there was left to it no longer a stable foundation, everything having been reduced to a series of conflicts, to the domination of the majority, or to the supremacy of special interests...
...It is apparent from these considerations that true peace, the peace of Christ, is impossible unless we are willing and ready to accept the fundamental principles of Christianity, unless we are willing to observe the teachings and obey the law of Christ, both in public and private life. If this were done, then society being placed at last on a sound foundation, the Church would be able, in the exercise of its divinely given ministry and by means of the teaching authority which results therefrom, to protect all the rights of God over men and nations...
...There is a species of moral, legal, and social modernism which We condemn, no less decidedly than We condemn theological modernism...
...We, therefore, who are now the heirs and depositories of the ideals and sacred duties of Our Venerated Predecessors, and like them alone invested with competent authority in such a weighty matter and responsible to no one but God for Our decisions, We protest, as they have protested before Us, against such a condition of affairs in defense of the rights and of the dignity of the Apostolic See, not because We are moved by any vain earthly ambition of which We should be ashamed, but out of a sense of Our duty to the dictates of conscience itself, mindful always of the fact that We too must one day die and of the awful account which We must render to the Divine Judge of the ministry which He has confided to Our care..."
(Things were happening in 1922 concerning the changing of everything, as well as those who wished to change the DEPOSIT OF FAITH, which has been handed down from the Apostles themselves, who received it from Jesus Christ Himself! How come our leaders aren't saying anything? Of course, you know we have a handful of faithful religious in the world. However, when they speak, they are quickly shut up, or sent to another place in the world with a different title. Woe to the LOSERS! We are ALL going to answer to the Master Jesus Christ at our demise. We need to wake up and be accountable! This includes our 'fearless' leaders.)
No comments:
Post a Comment