Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Interesting history leading up to the new mass one should know.  (Read 1184 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cassini

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3293
  • Reputation: +2076/-236
  • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Came across this the other day looking for information on Teilhard de Chardin. No harm in reminding ourselves what happened. The bits that did not surprise me were:

     'After receiving the constant support of Pope Leo XIII, the modernists were forced into retreat during the papacy of Pope St. Pius X. But after the Saint's death, the errors re-emerged.

    'Notwithstanding, as World War II raged on, de Chardin, thanks to the connivance of Pope Pius XII, continued to expound his new vision of Catholicism, ignoring the bans and restrictions. At that time, he reportedly remarked to a friend, “I now have so many friends in good strategic positions that I am absolutely without fear for the future.”'

    https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/i020_Mass-3.htm


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Interesting history leading up to the new mass one should know.
    « Reply #1 on: July 03, 2022, 11:46:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Came across this the other day looking for information on Teilhard de Chardin. No harm in reminding ourselves what happened. The bits that did not surprise me were:

    'After receiving the constant support of Pope Leo XIII, the modernists were forced into retreat during the papacy of Pope St. Pius X. But after the Saint's death, the errors re-emerged.

    'Notwithstanding, as World War II raged on, de Chardin, thanks to the connivance of Pope Pius XII, continued to expound his new vision of Catholicism, ignoring the bans and restrictions. At that time, he reportedly remarked to a friend, “I now have so many friends in good strategic positions that I am absolutely without fear for the future.”'

    https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/i020_Mass-3.htm

    There is a book written for the Knights of Our Lady which docuмents the long history of the ralliement (ie., basically, the compromise of the Church with secular states after the French Revolution), which might some day be approved for a general audience.  In it, Pope Leo XIII does not emerge unscathed.

    In any case, the reason the ralliement ceased upon the election of St. Pius X, and resumed after his death, is because the Sodalitium Pianum, which was hunting down and suppressing modernists with the approval of the pope, was immediately suppressed upon his death by his successor, Benedict XV.

    Just one year after St. Pius X’s death, the first pap ally approved dialogue Mass took place, and that sent the signal to all liberals that the “persecution” was over.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41860
    • Reputation: +23917/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Interesting history leading up to the new mass one should know.
    « Reply #2 on: July 03, 2022, 12:05:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    de Chardin, thanks to the connivance of Pope Pius XII, continued to expound his new vision of Catholicism

    That's a very strong statement and is made without any evidence.  Certainly Pope Pius XII never excommunicated or defrocked de Chardin, though he should have, but "connivance" implies much more than that.  Pius XII appears to have condemned de Chardin's core principle in Humani Generis and at one point referred to his work as "a cesspool of error".

    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3293
    • Reputation: +2076/-236
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Interesting history leading up to the new mass one should know.
    « Reply #3 on: July 03, 2022, 02:14:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That's a very strong statement and is made without any evidence.  Certainly Pope Pius XII never excommunicated or defrocked de Chardin, though he should have, but "connivance" implies much more than that.  Pius XII appears to have condemned de Chardin's core principle in Humani Generis and at one point referred to his work as "a cesspool of error".

    Unless he meant that Pope Pius XII was, like Teilhard, the absolute Big Banger who spent a lot of time in the Pontifical Academy of Science praising every guy who proposed the evolution of everything. Here are some of his utterances at the PAS.

    ‘With the joy of knowledge, you, elected geniuses, add the art of the search of truth, and then return to your studies and laboratories, rich in the thought which is the result of having conquered an enigma, so as to add to the admirable treasure-store of science. This is the way of human progress, a difficult avenue to take, marked by the footprints of the most audacious heroes of research from Thales, Aristotle, Archimedes, Ptolemy, from Galileo to Bacon, to Leonardo da Vinci, to Copernicus, to Kepler, Newton, Voltaire, Pasteur, Curie, Hertz, Edison, Marconi and one hundred more names that one could add; and to you who, having received the flame of investigation and knowledge, will pass it on with greater brilliance to even younger heroes, who are not afraid of the stumbling blocks and the risks of the way nor are they fearful of the funereal monuments erected to the glorious souls who have died along its path.’ --- Pope Pius XII ‘ladder’ address to the PAS, 3/12/1939.

    ‘The skies made of crystal have disappeared. The genius of Kepler and that of Newton were able to recognise in the sky the mechanical actions found on earth; in the flame and light of those revolving worlds you were able to discover elements to be found on our own globe; and by binding in marriage sky and earth you were able to extend the Empire of physics which was already rich in her pure and applied mathematical experiments, and in her genius, investigations and courageous acts and which had the effect of promoting nuclear and atomic physics.’ --- Pope Pius XII at the inaugural meeting of the PAS held 30th November 1941.

    That of course was before atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the cities where Christianity first took hold in Japan, killing and maiming over two hundred thousand inhabitants.

    On 8th February 1948, Pope Pius XII once again addressed the Academy. This time up for praise was Pierre-Simon Laplace, inventor of the first modern evolution theory. The Pope begins with a quote by Newton:


    ‘“I do not know how I appear to the world, but to myself I appear like a child, who plays on the shore of the sea and rejoices, because he finds every now and then a smoother pebble and a less well-known shell than usual, while the great ocean lies before him unexplored.” These words of Newton today, after three centuries in the modern ferment of the physical and natural sciences, sound more than ever true. Of Simon Laplace we hear that, while he was lying ill and the friends who were around him were remembering his great discovery [that a heliocentric solar system evolved], he replied, smiling bitterly: “that which we know is small, but that of which we are ignorant is immense.”’

    ‘Dispensing with the hypothesis of divine intervention would be a major activity of Laplace’s scientific life’ Wikipedia tells us. Recall Bonaparte asked Laplace - who ‘discovered,’ sorry modified, Immanuel Kant’s Nebular theory - where God fits in with this idea of an evolved solar system. Laplace replied: ‘Sire, I have no need for that hypothesis.’ Laplace’s ‘discovery,’ the supposed evolution of atomic-dust to a fixed-sun solar system, contains two heresies condemned long ago by the Fathers.

    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3293
    • Reputation: +2076/-236
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Interesting history leading up to the new mass one should know.
    « Reply #4 on: July 03, 2022, 02:27:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here is more of Pope Pius XII's evolutionism that he shared with Teilhard

    Next, Pope Pius XII then tries to make Genesis fit into the ‘scientific’ ages, stating radioactive dating shows the Earth and meteorites are five billion years old. 

    ‘Although these figures are astonishing, nevertheless, even the simplest believer would not take them as unheard of and differing from those derived from the first words of Genesis, ‘In the beginning …’, which signify the beginning of things in time. These words take on a concrete and almost mathematical expression, and new comfort is given to those who share with the Apostle an esteem for Scripture, divinely inspired, which is always useful to teach, to prove, to correct, to educate...
    How different and reflecting great vision is the language of a modern top-grade scientist, Sir Edmund Whittaker, a Pontifical Academician, when he speaks of his researches concerning the age of the world…“We may perhaps without impropriety refer to it as the Creation. It supplies a concordant background to the view of the world which is suggested by the geological evidence, that every organism ever existent on the earth has had a beginning in time. If this result should be confirmed by later researches, it may well come to be regarded as the most momentous discovery of the age; for it represents a fundamental change in the scientific conception of the universe, such as was affected four centuries ago by Copernicus”’

    So, according to Pope Pius XII, St Thomas was wrong. It seems how the world began can be known or demonstrated by unaided reason.


    1943: Divino Afflante Spiritu

    ‘There were glimmers of hope during the anti-modernist decades. Catholic scholars in German universities and the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome (founded in 1909) continued to pursue solid scholarship, principally in philosophy and archaeology. Of special significance is the work of Augustine Bea, S.J. (1881-1968) who became best known as a leader in ecuмenism at Vatican II… Bea had an immense impact on the composition and publication of Divino Afflante Spiritu.’ (America: the Jesuit Review, Sept, 1993)

    ‘This freeze endured until in 1943 Pius XII’s great encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu reopened the door to the use of modern methods of Biblical study and established scholarship in the scientific investigation of the Scriptures. The Pontifical Biblical Commission was quick to follow this initiative with a letter to Cardinal Suhard, Archbishop of Paris… taking this as an encouragement to revisit areas which had been blocked off by earlier decisions… stressing that in the context of the times it would have been unwise to teach a particular doctrine, but not that a particular doctrine was untrue or incorrect …No responsible Biblical scholar would today agree with any of these directives of the Biblical Commission.’ (Henry Wansbrough OSB (current member of the PBC: The Centenary of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Ampleforth Journal, autumn 2003.)

    1950: Humani Generis

    ‘36. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God…..’

    Pope Pius XII’s Big Bang

    The courtship between Catholic faith and scientism reached a further low point on November 22, 1951 when Pope Pius XII once again addressed the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. The title of the Pope’s address was ‘The Proofs for the Existence of God in the Light of Modern Natural Science.’

    ‘44. It is undeniable that when a mind enlightened and enriched with modern scientific knowledge weighs this problem calmly, it feels drawn to break through the circle of completely independent or autochthonous matter, whether uncreated or self-created, and to ascend to a creating Spirit. With the same clear and critical look with which it examines and passes judgment on facts, it perceives and recognizes the work of creative omnipotence, whose power, set in motion by the mighty “Fiat” pronounced billions of years ago by the Creating Spirit, spread out over the universe, calling into existence with a gesture of generous love matter bursting with energy. In fact, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial “Fiat lux” uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies.’ On the other hand, how different and much more faithful a reflection of limitless visions is the language of an outstanding modern scientist, Sir Edmund Whittaker (1873-1956), member of the Pontifical Academy of Science, when he speaks of the above-mentioned inquiries into the age of the world: “These different calculations point to the conclusion that there was a time, some nine or ten billion years ago, prior to which the cosmos, if it existed, existed in a form totally different from anything we know, and this form constitutes the very last limit of science. We refer to it not improperly as creation. It provides a unifying background, suggested by geological evidence, for that explanation of the world according to which every organism existing on the Earth had a beginning in time. Were this conclusion to be confirmed by future research, it might well be considered as the most outstanding discovery of our times, since it represents a fundamental change in the scientific conception of the universe, similar to the one brought about four centuries ago by Copernicus.” It has, besides, followed the course and the direction of cosmic developments, and, just as it was able to get a glimpse of the term toward which these developments were inexorably leading, so also has it pointed to their beginning in time some five billion years ago. Thus, with that concreteness which is characteristic of physical proofs, it has confirmed the contingency of the universe and also the well-founded deduction as to the epoch when the cosmos came forth from the hands of the Creator.’--- Pope Pius XII, 1951.



    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3293
    • Reputation: +2076/-236
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Interesting history leading up to the new mass one should know.
    « Reply #5 on: July 03, 2022, 02:39:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, admits Pope Pius XII, the changes all began with Copernicus. Well, not really, had the pope studied Church history as well as their Big Bang evolution of the world he would have found in the secret archives records of these same heresies being condemned in the early centuries of the Catholic Church, just as Professor A. A. Martinez found and recorded in his book Burned Alive. But there are other philosophical and theological consequences to placing the creative act of God at the mercy of the Big Bang of theoretical physicists.

    Marcello Pera writes: ‘Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that we can refer “not improperly” to the initial singularity [the Big Bang] as an act of creation. What conclusions can we draw from it? That a Creator exists? Suppose still, for the sake of argument, that this, too, is conceded. The problem now is twofold. Is this creator theologically relevant? Can this creator serve the purpose of faith? My answer to the first question is decidedly negative. A creator proved by cosmology is a cosmological agent that has none of the properties a believer attributes to God. Even supposing one can consistently say the cosmological creator is beyond space and time, this creature cannot be understood as a person or as the Word made flesh or as the Son of God come down to the world in order to save mankind. Pascal rightly referred to this latter Creator as the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” not of philosophers and scientists. To believe that cosmology proves the existence of a creator and then to attribute to this creator the properties of the Creation as a person is to make an illegitimate inference, to commit a category fallacy. My answer to the second question is also negative. Suppose we can grant what my answer to the first question intends to deny. That is, suppose we can understand the God of [Big Bang] cosmologists as the God of theologians and believers. Such a God cannot (and should not) serve the purpose of faith, because, being a God proved by cosmology he should be at the mercy of cosmology. Like any other scientific discipline that, to use Pope John Paul II’s words, proceeds with “methodological seriousness,” cosmology is always revisable. It might then happen that a creator proved on the basis of a theory will be refuted when that theory is refuted. Can the God of believers be exposed to the risk of such an inconsistent enterprise as science?’ (Marcello Pera: The god of theologians and the god of astronomers, as found in The Cambridge Companion to Galileo, Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.378, 379.)

    Offline ServusInutilisDomini

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 529
    • Reputation: +249/-87
    • Gender: Male
    • O sacrum convivum... https://youtu.be/-WCicnX6pN8
    Re: Interesting history leading up to the new mass one should know.
    « Reply #6 on: July 04, 2022, 05:37:12 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, admits Pope Pius XII, the changes all began with Copernicus. Well, not really, had the pope studied Church history as well as their Big Bang evolution of the world he would have found in the secret archives records of these same heresies being condemned in the early centuries of the Catholic Church, just as Professor A. A. Martinez found and recorded in his book Burned Alive. But there are other philosophical and theological consequences to placing the creative act of God at the mercy of the Big Bang of theoretical physicists.

    Marcello Pera writes: ‘Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that we can refer “not improperly” to the initial singularity [the Big Bang] as an act of creation. What conclusions can we draw from it? That a Creator exists? Suppose still, for the sake of argument, that this, too, is conceded. The problem now is twofold. Is this creator theologically relevant? Can this creator serve the purpose of faith? My answer to the first question is decidedly negative. A creator proved by cosmology is a cosmological agent that has none of the properties a believer attributes to God. Even supposing one can consistently say the cosmological creator is beyond space and time, this creature cannot be understood as a person or as the Word made flesh or as the Son of God come down to the world in order to save mankind. Pascal rightly referred to this latter Creator as the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” not of philosophers and scientists. To believe that cosmology proves the existence of a creator and then to attribute to this creator the properties of the Creation as a person is to make an illegitimate inference, to commit a category fallacy. My answer to the second question is also negative. Suppose we can grant what my answer to the first question intends to deny. That is, suppose we can understand the God of [Big Bang] cosmologists as the God of theologians and believers. Such a God cannot (and should not) serve the purpose of faith, because, being a God proved by cosmology he should be at the mercy of cosmology. Like any other scientific discipline that, to use Pope John Paul II’s words, proceeds with “methodological seriousness,” cosmology is always revisable. It might then happen that a creator proved on the basis of a theory will be refuted when that theory is refuted. Can the God of believers be exposed to the risk of such an inconsistent enterprise as science?’ (Marcello Pera: The god of theologians and the god of astronomers, as found in The Cambridge Companion to Galileo, Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.378, 379.)
    Great quotes, thanks.

    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3293
    • Reputation: +2076/-236
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Interesting history leading up to the new mass one should know.
    « Reply #7 on: July 04, 2022, 06:35:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Great quotes, thanks.

    Not for one second however, do I suggest that any pope involved in modernist scientism acted out of wrongful intention or outright malice. Rather they acted in ignorance, receiving false information from those advising them, and through pressure ‘to do the right thing for the Church’ as they thought. Little did they know what they were contributing to as the following comment from an atheist in 1879 reveals!


    ‘The scientific Christians now admit that the bible is not inspired in its astronomy, geology, botany, zoology, or in any science. In other words, they admit that on these subjects, the bible cannot be depended upon… If the people of Europe had known as much of astronomy and geology when the Bible was introduced among them, as they do now, there never could have been one believer in the doctrine of [divine] inspiration. If the writers of the various parts of the bible had known as much about the sciences as is now known by every intelligent man, the Bible never could have been written. It was produced by ignorance and has been believed and defended by its author. It has lost power in the proportion that man has gained knowledge. A few years ago, this Bible was appealed to in the settlement of all scientific questions; but now, even the clergy confess that in such matters, it has ceased to speak with the voice of authority. For the establishment of facts, the word of man is now considered far better than the word of God. In the world of science, Jehovah was superseded by Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, [Newton, Darwin, Lyell, Einstein and Teilhard de Chardin]. All that God told Moses, admitting the entire account to be true, is dust and ashes compared to the discoveries of [science]. In matters of fact, the Bible has ceased to be regarded as a standard. Science has succeeded in breaking the chains of theology. Some years ago, Science endeavored to show that it was not inconsistent with the Scriptures. Now, Religion is endeavoring to prove that the Bible is not inconsistent with science. The standard has been changed’ (Robert G. Ingersoll: Some Mistakes of Moses, Book Tree, 1879)

    We see again, in this diatribe, reference to the part ‘intellectuals’ played in the move from sensory and Biblical geocentrism to ‘scientifically proven’ secular naturalism. Intelligence, the extent or ability of one’s reasoning, while a great gift from God comes with a high price tag, especially when engaging in matters challenging traditional Catholic dogma, theology, and metaphysics. Saint Augustine once affirmed: ‘If there were no pride, there would be no heresy.’ In 2015, an exorcist in Barcelona said of all the sins preferred by Satan, pride was the greatest. We all want to be clever, and the cleverer the better; fallen man revels in ‘vainglory in one’s own reasoning’ as Galileo boasted. Such a talent produces an interior, personal and social satisfaction that is irresistible to those that have it. It can bring honour, glory, respect, advantage, reward, and fame to some who excel in any given field of knowledge, especially when telling all in the Pontifical Academy of Sciences I am with you all the way with your science. Sir Francis Bacon understood this very well with his ‘knowledge itself is power.’ However, conforming and contributing to a consensus can be a path to success among one’s peers, but in regard to origins, the temptations involved here are enormous, for intelligence can also be the source of pride. The great intellectual saints such as Augustine, Aquinas, Bonaventure, and Bellarmine all knew that intellectual pride is an area that Satan has not neglected. These men refused accolades and honours, preferring instead to embrace humility and exalt divine authority and teaching. 

    For if you did believe Moses, you would believe Me also;
    for he wrote of Me.(John 5:46)