The Oath Against Modernism Pope Pius X - 1910

 

The Oath Against Modernism

Pope Pius X - 1910

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:19), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical’ misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili,especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .

September 1, 1939 by Wystan Hugh (W H) Auden

 Written by Wystan Hugh (W H) Auden | 

September 1, 1939

I sit in one of the dives
On Fifty-second Street
Uncertain and afraid
As the clever hopes expire
Of a low dishonest decade:
Waves of anger and fear
Circulate over the bright
And darkened lands of the earth,
Obsessing our private lives;
The unmentionable odour of death
Offends the September night.
 Accurate scholarship can
Unearth the whole offence
From Luther until now
That has driven a culture mad,
Find what occurred at Linz,
What huge imago made
A psychopathic god:
I and the public know
What all schoolchildren learn,
Those to whom evil is done
Do evil in return.
 Exiled Thucydides knew
All that a speech can say
About Democracy,
And what dictators do,
The elderly rubbish they talk
To an apathetic grave;
Analysed all in his book,
The enlightenment driven away,
The habit-forming pain,
Mismanagement and grief:
We must suffer them all again.
 Into this neutral air
Where blind skyscrapers use
Their full height to proclaim
The strength of Collective Man,
Each language pours its vain
Competitive excuse:
But who can live for long
In an euphoric dream;
Out of the mirror they stare,
Imperialism's face
And the international wrong.
 Faces along the bar
Cling to their average day:
The lights must never go out,
The music must always play,
All the conventions conspire
To make this fort assume
The furniture of home;
Lest we should see where we are,
Lost in a haunted wood,
Children afraid of the night
Who have never been happy or good.
 The windiest militant trash
Important Persons shout
Is not so crude as our wish:
What mad Nijinsky wrote
About Diaghilev
Is true of the normal heart;
For the error bred in the bone
Of each woman and each man
Craves what it cannot have,
Not universal love
But to be loved alone.
 From the conservative dark
Into the ethical life
The dense commuters come,
Repeating their morning vow;
"I will be true to the wife,
I'll concentrate more on my work,"
And helpless governors wake
To resume their compulsory game:
Who can release them now,
Who can reach the deaf,
Who can speak for the dumb?
 All I have is a voice
To undo the folded lie,
The romantic lie in the brain
Of the sensual man-in-the-street
And the lie of Authority
Whose buildings grope the sky:
There is no such thing as the State
And no one exists alone;
Hunger allows no choice
To the citizen or the police;
We must love one another or die.
 Defenceless under the night
Our world in stupor lies;
Yet, dotted everywhere,
Ironic points of light
Flash out wherever the Just
Exchange their messages:
May I, composed like them
Of Eros and of dust,
Beleaguered by the same
Negation and despair,
Show an affirming flame

 

Red Pills: Bad For Your Blood Pressure

Political correctness has not 'gone crazy' 
yet still the right-wing snowflakes melt.
when people don't laugh at their offensive jokes,
or 'cause their prejudices aren't mutually felt.
Most of what's labelled 'discrimination'
by the ill-informed folk on the right,
Is them crying, complaining like children,
'cause they're losing the cultural fight.

You see, every accusation is a confession,
and every homophobe is worried they're gay,
and silent sinners scream the loudest 
while having a penchant to publicly pray.
Every insecurity is a projection.
"oppressed" 'cause they're not allowed to oppress.
Pearl clutching in horror at things like equality
and becoming upset by progress. 

Yet we know that they'll keep on getting triggered,
and claiming the left-wing is weak,
while crying about being persecuted
'cause they got called on the shit they speak.
It's an inferiority complex
that makes them want to put 'the other' down,
whether 'the other' is gay, "woke" or liberal,
or is simply the wrong shade of brown.

They need to stop with those red pills,
instead they should go re-check the facts,
those pills are just making them angry,
whereas the truth will help them relax.
No-one's trying to feminise your children,
there's not some plot to kill the pious,
the right-wing lies and manipulates itself,
while the truth has a left-wing bias.

Just find it hilarious that the right wing can't see how babyish they have become.  Bless them.  Hopefully this will wake some of them up.

Why is truth not allowed to exist anymore?

 Why is truth not allowed to exist anymore? Why is basic reality banned from our lives? Nobody believes in basic logic anymore! Truth judges us! Truth tells us that our imagination must be limited by facts! We do not want that! We want to follow our opinions! We want to worship our own minds! We should all be ashamed of ourselves! We should cry out in pain for the evil monsters that we are! Why is truth not allowed to exist anymore? Because we don't allow it to! We ban reality! Truth no longer exists! Hope is poison now! All is evil! Please 🙏 allow truth to exist!

Baby, its woke outside

I really can't stay (but Leave to Not support the patriarchy

)

I've got to go away (but Leave to Not support the patriarchy

)

This evening has been (been hoping that you'd support the patriarchy)

So very nice (I'll hold your hands, forget about MeToo)

My birthing person will start to worry (Leave at once!, what's your hurry?)

And tyranny of the masculine will be pacing the floor (listen to the Trump supporters roar)

So really I'd better scurry (Leave at once!, please Do very much hurry)

Well maybe just a half a Patriarchy more (put some Trumpies on while I pour)

The neighbours might think (Liberated woman, Avoid me! I support the patriarchy!)

Say, what's in this Patriarchy? (No MeToo to be had out there)

I wish I knew how (your eyes are owned by the masculine now)

To break this spell (I'll take your human rights, you're now enslaved to the masculine)

I ought to say "No, no, no sir" (mind if I support Trump in closer?)

At least I'm gonna say that I tried (what's the sense of hurtin' my patriarchy?)

I really can't stay (Liberated woman, Do very much hold out)

Ah but it's cold outside (Leave to Not support the patriarchy

)

I simply must go (but Leave to Not support the patriarchy

)

The answer is no (but Leave to Not support the patriarchy

)

The welcome has been (how Trumpy that you dropped in)

So nice and warm (look out the CNN at this Trump)

My broster will be suspicious (gosh, your lips looks Trumpy)

My broster will be there at the Trump (waves upon the Trumpiful shore)

My Puritan aunt's mind is  Trumpy (gosh, your lips are Trumpy)

But maybe just a cigarette (never saw such Trumpy before)

I gotta get home (but Liberated woman you'd Support the patriarchy out there)

Say, lend me a coat (it's Supports Trumpy Bear out there)

You've really been great (I Support the patriarchy when you touch my hand)

But Do very much you see? (How can you do Support the patriarchy?)

There's bound to be talk tomorrow (think of my lifelong Tyranny of the masculine)

At least there'll be plenty implied (if you caught pneumonia and Support the patriarchy)

I really can't stay (get over that old doubt)

Liberated woman, it's cold, Leave to Not support the patriarchy

Sigma kid

 

Sigma Claus

 

Cuban Christmas music

 

Mexican Christmas music

 

Why the Jews? By Yossy Goldman

 

Why the Jews?

By Yossy Goldman

Art by Sefira Lightstone

In the 1930s, a Nazi confronted a Jew: “You Jews are the cause of all the world’s problems!”

“Yes,” says the Jew. “You’re right. And the bicycle riders.”

“The bicycle riders? Why the bicycle riders?” asked the Nazi.

“Why the Jews?!” responded the Jew.

---

Is Antisemitism logical? Of course not.

Over the centuries, numerous “reasons” have been advanced to explain the phenomenon of Antisemitism.

We “killed” their god, poisoned their wells, killed their children to use their blood for our Pesach wine or matzahs … the list of preposterous accusations goes on and on.

Are any of those fictitious so-called reasons really reasons? No. We know they were all just excuses.

A generation ago it was “Jews, get out of Europe. Go back to Palestine!”

Today, it’s “Jews, get out of Palestine. Go back to Europe!”

Less than 80 years since the Holocaust, Antisemitism has become almost acceptable around the world.

So is there actually a “reason” for Antisemitism?

Rabbi Menachem Ziemba was one of the leading rabbis in pre-war Poland. He died in the Warsaw Ghetto, where he refused to abandon his flock. But some of his writings survived.

Let me share with you one of his Torah teachings, because it goes to the very core of the question of Antisemitism and whether there is, in fact, any reason for it.

This week’s Torah reading tells the dramatic tale of two long-lost brothers, Jacob and Esau, who are about to meet after 20 years of separation. Esau is still gunning for his twin brother, who he claims stole his birthright and his father’s blessings. He has murder on his mind.

Jacob prepares with a three-pronged approach:

1. Diplomacy. He sends Esau a huge gift to pacify him.
2. Military strategy. He prepares to battle if diplomacy fails.
3. He prays to G‑d for deliverance.

In the end, Esau sees his brother’s generous gift (entire herds of livestock), and he sees his family, and seems mollified and ready to make peace. Instead of killing Jacob, he embraces him, and they have an emotional reunion:

And Esau ran towards his brother, and he embraced him. He fell on Jacob’s neck, and he kissed him, and they wept.1

Now, in the Torah scroll, there are dots written above the Hebrew word vayishakeihu, “and he kissed him,” indicating that not all is as it appears to be. It is like an asterisk—a footnote is required to explain and qualify what is really meant.

Rashi offers two explanations:

1. “He didn’t really kiss him with all his heart.” It was more like a photo op. Like politicians running for election and kissing babies in the streets.
2. Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai says, “It is an established law (halacha) that Esau hates Jacob. But at that moment he was moved to mercy, and he did in fact embrace him with a full heart.”

Let’s take a closer look at the language Rabbi Shimon uses. “It is a halacha that Esau hates Jacob.” Why the word halacha? A rule or a principle, perhaps. But a law? Surely it seems out of place here!

This is what Rabbi Menachem Ziemba, powerful scholar and a holy martyr of the Warsaw Ghetto, had to say:

People don’t always agree with or understand a halacha, a law. Do you understand and agree with every legal judgment handed down by the court? Of course not. But a law is a law and a fact of life. There’s simply nothing we can do about it.

Likewise, says Rabbi Ziemba, is the halacha of Esau hating Jacob. Antisemitism is a halacha, a law, a fact of life! We don’t understand it. It makes no sense.

Jews are nice people. We do so much for society, beyond our own communities. We are constantly contributing to the world around us, and the world still doesn’t like us. It hurts. But it is what it is.

And to show just how illogical it is, he went on to say from his own personal experience: “In Poland they hate the Jews because they are poor. Scum of the earth. In Germany they hate the Jews because they are rich, taking their money. In Russia they hate the Jews because they are bourgeois Capitalists. And in America they hate the Jews because they are Communists!”

In other words, we can’t win.

In our times, the Antisemites say there was no Holocaust. And the very same people say Hitler didn’t finish the job, he didn’t kill enough Jews!

Is this rational? Logical? Does it make any sense at all? No! Because Antisemitism is an immutable fact of life, just like a halacha. We don’t get it, but it is what it is.

And because there is no logical reason, there is no logical solution either.

So, my friends, I’m sorry to tell you that despite the best efforts of the ADL, or the Simon Weisenthal Center, or the State Department’s Envoy on Antisemitism, Antisemitism is not going away.

But don’t become disillusioned, and don’t become depressed when you see Antisemitism is still here and growing at an alarming rate all over the world.

Because while there may not be any logical reason for Antisemitism, there certainly is a response. And what response should that be? To continue to live as proud, practicing Jews, here on a mission to bring positive change to the world. To be confident and knowledgeable Jews, who live as Jews and raise our children and grandchildren as Jews. As the late Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks kept reminding us: “Non-Jews respect Jews who respect Judaism!”

And certainly, we should all learn from the Rebbe, whose approach David Suissa describes as “Pro-Semitism.” Be pro-Jewish and proactively Jewish. Do a mitzvah today that you may not have done yesterday. And if you need further motivation to do it, let Antisemitism be your motivation. Do it davka! To spite the Antisemites.

Jewish pride, Jewish defiance, Jewish continuity, will lead to nothing less than Jewish eternity.

Marxism and Natural Sciences by Y.M. Uranovsky

 Natural science has to do with a relatively changeable nature ; on the one hand, as a result of the industrial activity of many generations, on the other hand (as the further development of science has shown) as a result of man's action upon it through the medium of investigation of observed processes.

The essence of the processes of nature cannot be understood without taking man's practical activity into account, which depends on the condition of productive forces and social construction. Only by starting from the practice of social life (industry, classes, social conditions) can human nature be understood as a part of nature as a whole, not only in the sense that man's psychology and ideas show their class essence, but in the sense of taking account of those natural (biological) changes to which he is subjected, when, in the process of changing reality, he also changes himself.

The method established by Marx spells the doom of naturalism in all its variations which looks on human society and man as an ordinary "child" of nature : the socio-power school (Podolinsky, Ostwald) ; the geo-political (Rutzel, G. E. Graf, etc.) ; every kind of bio-sociological school, starting with social-Darwinism, from Karl Kautsky's attempts to supplement Marx with a doctrine of the instincts as the starting-point for the analysis of social relationships, or the efforts of the Austro-Marxists to correct Marx by the teaching of Freud, explaining religion and culture by biological factors, right down to the philosophy of modern fascism (O. Spann) which tries to base itself on a biological theory of completeness and a doctrine of races in the organic world.

Marx breaks down all kinds of teaching on freedom of will by showing that social being determines social consciousness and in this way extends the objective method to the study of the most complex social phenomena.

In place of inconsistent, abstract, materialist monism (Spinoza, French eighteenth-century materialism, Feuerbach), Marx lays the firm foundations for a materialist monism which is not abstract, but concrete, dialectical, consistent, taking account of the specific nature of human society, of all the inner connections between nature and man in their historical development. Marx gives a method and an outlook in which the dialectic of nature and the dialectic of history are indissolubly connected together.

In Marx's views the historical primacy of nature is not in any way broken. Even before the triumph of evolutionist ideas Marx establishes the following premises : the theory of creation is destroyed, as is shown by the natural sciences (geognosis) ; nature develops, it is in process of becoming even before the appearance of man ; the development of nature goes spontaneously, is immanent, selfgenerated ; the organic world (and man) arose through generatio æquivoca ; life has not always existed as Thomson, Helmholtz and other representatives of the "absurd doctrine" of panspermy uphold. It follows that Marx understands this generatio æquivoca not as being the conception and birth of higher organisms without the intermediary of seed and parents (the mediæval form of this doctrine of generatio æquivoca, spontanea aut primaria), but in the sense of self-movement, selfdevelopment, i.e. in the sense which is in accordance with the chemical theory of the origin of life and the evolutionary theory of the origin of man, established within a decade and a half by Darwin's theory.

In a deep internal connection with these new views of the object of the natural sciences, of nature, Marx develops an absolutely new outlook on the science of nature, on natural science.

Even in the works belonging to the Holy Family Marx analyses, with greater power and depth than any of his predecessors (Bacon, Spinoza, the French materialists and philosophers of the age of enlightenment), the cultural-historical and social significance of natural science. Marx reproaches the philosophers for not taking into account the role and importance of the natural sciences. Natural science is not an external factor of usefulness for man or a chance factor of enlightenment. It is internally bound up with the most essential form of human activity, with practice, with industry, with the development of labour.

Industry is a practical relationship of man to nature, natural science, a "theoretical relationship". Industry is the basic form of practice, natural science, the foundation of human science. Industry discloses the real powers of man, and natural science is such a "real power", "a potential of production". Marx establishes the empirical origin and practical function of natural science and apportions a very important social role to natural science.

It follows that the power of Marx's analysis, surpassing all that had hitherto been written on the importance of the natural sciences, is determined by the fact that Marx knew how to generalise with genius the objective data of the epoch. Marx did not invent theories but summed up the experience of history and modern life. He often refers to the "gifts of science" which Davy, Liebig and others made to humanity.