jump to navigation

Pope Gregory XVI speaks to the Church today…….especially the modernists within November 20, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, damnable blasphemy, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Papa, SOD, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.

In 1832, Pope Gregory XVI released his famous encyclical against religious indifferentism, Mirari Vos.  The encyclical was a reaction to the first clear instance of obstinate, erroneous Catholic liberalism, an attempt to meld the Faith and the revolutionary ideas of the 18th century, but which, as always, wound up favoring the latter much more than the former.  A group of one time faithful Catholics under Lamennais of France drifted into more and more errors through their embrace of liberalism, and had to be corrected. Corrected they were, and the rest of the faithful, both then and now, have been greatly edified by the great pontiff’s words.

What follows are some selective excerpts from Mirari Vos.  I would be lying if I said the video I posted  yesterday did not cross my mind more than once or twice while reading the below:

Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse gregoryxviopinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained[Or so long as one does occasional corporal works of mercy, or, maybe better yet, participates in “ecumenical” activities] Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that “there is one God, one faith, one baptism” may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that “those who are not with Christ are against Him,” and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore “without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.” [“Whole and entire,” not kinda sorta, and certainly not possessing antagonistic and heretical protestant beliefs]  Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: “He who is for the See of Peter is for me.” A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: “The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?” [Really…..meditate on that in the light of yesterday’s video, when the exact opposite proposition was put forth.]


Pope in a cowboy hat!

This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. [So I guess John Courtney Murray didn’t read much of Gregory XVI.  How was this clear teaching forgotten in 1965? This directly contradicts statements in Dignitatis Humanae] It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. “But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,” as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly “the bottomless pit” is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws — in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty.

Now, however, We want you to rally to combat the abominable conspiracy against clerical celibacy. This conspiracy spreads daily and is promoted by profligate philosophers, some even from the clerical order. They have forgotten their person and office, and have been carried away by the enticements of pleasure. They have even dared to make repeated public demands to the princes for the abolition of that most holy discipline. But it is disgusting to dwell on these evil attempts at length. Rather, We ask that you strive with all your might Gregory_XVIto justify and to defend the law of clerical celibacy as prescribed by the sacred canons, against which the arrows of the lascivious are directed from every side. [I guess we can assume Kasper the Klown Kardinal doesn’t truck much with Gregory XVI, either]

Now the honorable marriage of Christians, which Paul calls “a great sacrament in Christ and the Church,”[Heb XIII:4] demands our shared concern lest anything contrary to its sanctity and indissolubility is proposed. [So clear, so easily understood……how have so many forgotten?]  Our predecessor Pius VIII would recommend to you his own letters on the subject. However, troublesome efforts against this sacrament still continue to be made. [Yes, they do] The people therefore must be zealously taught that a marriage rightly entered upon cannot be dissolved; for those joined in matrimony God has ordained a perpetual companionship for life and a knot of necessity which cannot be loosed except by death. [A marriage once rightly entered upon cannot be dissolved. Hear that, Synod?  Hear that, Kardinal Kasper?  Hear that, Archbishop Forte?] Recalling that matrimony is a sacrament and therefore subject to the Church, let them consider and observe the laws of the Church concerning it. Let them take care lest for any reason they permit that which is an obstruction to the teachings of the canons and the decrees of the councils. They should be aware that those marriages will have an unhappy end which are entered upon contrary to the discipline of the Church or without God’s favor or because of concupiscence alone, with no thought of the sacrament and of the mysteries signified by it.

———End Quote———

Great, great encyclical. I cannot encourage you enough to read the whole thing.  If you are like me, you will be both incredibly edified and incredibly depressed by doing so.  Edified by the wonderful content therein, depressed at the massive gulf that divides the care given to souls by holy men of the past and that which we are given today.  Pope Gregory XVI, you great pope, you holy man, you combatant against heresy and error, pray for us!  Pray for our Church!

God willing, I may post more from this mighty work of the Lord next week.



1. discipleofthedumbox - November 20, 2014

“This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained”

Pelagianism. Pure and simple. Something Catholics were accused of by Protestants, interestingly enough.

Tantumblogo - November 20, 2014

Yes, and interesting how that term is tossed about by some today.

2. steve - November 20, 2014

I appreciate reading such things here and on additional Traditional Catholic blog or via my books.

But please forgive me if the following sounds as a knock against you (and additional Catholic blogs):

I sometimes wonder what the point is to such postings.

Rather, it’s beyond that and I pray that it doesn’t border upon personal despair.

What I am really asking/saying is what does an 1832 A.D. Encyclical mean to 99 percent of today’s Churchmen…to 99 percent of today’s Catholics?

“We” don’t even care about the beautiful and traditional documents produced by Pope Saint John XXIII, Pope Venerable Pius XII and Pope Pius XI.

“We” don’t care that in his first Encyclical 1959 A.D., which was wonderfully traditional, Pope Saint John XXIII declared in clear terms that the Catholic Church is the True Church.

In also in clear terms exhorted non-Catholics to join the True Church.

“We” don’t even care today that Vatican II teaches us to pray the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin and utilize Gregorian Chant as the primary form of Latin Church liturgical music.

What does an 1832 A.D. Encyclical mean to the majority of today’s Churchmen and laymen?

Again, please note that this really isn’t about you and your blog.

I guess that I need some positive feedback to perk me up.

Visitor - November 21, 2014

For me, it matters a lot. I come here to read things like this because I am virtually without guidance at my parish, and poorly catechized. It gives me hope.

3. steve - November 21, 2014

I am thankful that it matters a lot to you.

You and I and almost everybody who reads this fine blog are like-minded in our attachment to Holy Tradition.

Unfortunately, are ilk are but a drop in the bucket in the Church today.

That is why my question/point was what does an 1832 A.D. Encyclical mean to 99 percent of today’s Catholics?

The majority of our Churchmen have made it clear, for example, that the 1962 A.D. Roman Missal of Pope Saint John XXIII is basically “outdated”.

In regard to the recent Extraordinary Synod, scores of influential Churchmen made it clear that documents on homosexuality and divorced/remarried Catholics issued by Popes Saint John XXIII and Benedict XVI are “water under the bridge”.

Vatican II documents that promote Latin and Gregorian Chant don’t mean a thing, for example, to the majority of Latin Church bishops, priests and laymen.

In light of such thinking that prevails today throughout the Church, I believe that my question/point is valid.

I must ask, unfortunately, what real meaning does a 182-year-old Encyclical, particularly one that upbraids the thinking that prevails in today’s Church, hold for 99 percent of Catholics?

LaGallina - November 21, 2014

So Church teaching only has meaning when the majority says it does? According to your last statement, that is what you believe.

And, honestly, what do 99% of Catholics have to do with anything? Are Traditional Catholics supposed to ignore the past 2000 years of Church history and get on board with Vatican 2 just because 99% of Catholics have done so? Since the Council of Trent is out of style according to 99% of Catholics should we just declare it null and void? Should we toss Sacred Scripture just because 99% think it’s too old fashioned?

Your question doesn’t even make sense. The Catholic Church is not a democracy and truth cannot change. Popularity has absolutely no bearing on truth.

And for the record, there are plenty of people (like me) new to Tradition and aching to understand what the True Catholic Church teaches, not what 99% of people think it teaches. And blogs like this one — especially this one — are teaching us just that. You don’t seem to understand that there are still truth seekers out there, and sources like this are vital. Do we not matter just because we are not part of the 99%?

Forgive me, Steve, but I really don’t “get” you. And actually I had really come to the comment page to say, “Wow! Thank you Tantum for showing us this tidbit of truth in the midst of the post-Synod confusion.”

4. TG - November 21, 2014

Steve, I get what your are saying but some of the new readers are getting educated.

5. steve - November 22, 2014


Your misunderstanding of my question/point is my fault. Mea culpa.


6. steve - November 22, 2014


Thank you.

I guess that some people thought that I meant that the truth of the Church’s teachings is tied to majority rule.

What I really meant was that the Faith has collapsed to such an extent that unfortunately and tragically, that which the Church had held as holy and priceless treasures for century upon century…such as the Traditional Latin Mass and Holy Tradition…have been cast aside just during the past 40 years.

Therefore, as such priceless holy treasures matter not to the majority of today’s Catholics, what chance does an 1832 A,D, Encyclical have in attempting to appeal to said folks.

I grew up in a (Latin) Church that featured the Traditional Latin Mass, meatless Fridays, regular Saturday Confession, condemnation of the Ecumenical Movement…

…now, the Traditional Latin Mass is despised by bishops, priests and laymen…Catholics wolf down hamburgers on Fridays, confessionals are virtually empty, Popes, Cardinals and bishops pray and worship with non-Catholics…they partake in ceremonies in Protestant buildings, synagogues and mosques.

It is against that background that I asked…what does a traditional 1832 A.D. Encyclical mean to today’s Novus Ordo, Ecumenical Movement-obsessed Catholics?

That is my point.

Some people got it.

Some people didn’t get it.

Mea culpa.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: