Interior of the S. Clemente Basilica
“Basilica” fig. 16. Encyclopædia Britannica (1910), vol. 3 p. 475.
“The Syllabus containing the most important errors of our time, which have been condemned by our Holy Father Pius IX in Allocutions, at Consistories, in Encyclicals, and other Apostolic Letters”was issued by Cardinal Antonelli: Sec. of State (8 Dec. 1864).
No longer making any secret of their purposes, they are now boldly rising up against God Himself. They are planning the destruction of holy Church publicly and openly, and this with the set purpose of utterly despoiling the nations of Christendom, if it were possible, of the blessings obtained for us through Jesus Christ our Savior.
[...] it follows that there can be no true religion other than that which is founded on the revealed word of God: which revelation, begun from the beginning and continued under the Old Law, Christ Jesus Himself under the New Law perfected. [...] for the glory of God and our own salvation, the Only-begotten Son of God founded His Church on earth. [§ 6] [...] for the union of Christians can only be promoted [by this Apostolic See] by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it.[§ 10]
[...] a fair-minded assessment of recent events and trends leads to the conclusion that the scale and severity of Islamophobia pales in comparison with the bloody Christophobia currently coursing through the Muslim-majority nations from one end of the globe to the other. The conspiracy of silence surrounding this violent expression of religious intolerance has to stop. Nothing less than the fate of Christianity-- and ultimately of all religious minorities-- in the Islamic world is at stake. From blasphemy laws to brutal murders to bombings to mutilations and the bombing of religious sites, Christians in so many nations live in fear. [†] [emphasis added]
22〈Pontius〉 Pilate saith to them: What shall I do then with Jesus that is called Christ? (23)They say all: Let him be crucified. 23The governor said to them: Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying: Let him be crucified. 24 And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, taking water washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man. Look you to it.The accusation of deicide is widely documented in the New Testament, as a few hours of study will easily reveal: Mt. [26:66; 27:1--2, 12--13, 22--26; 28:11--15], Mk. [15:1--4, 10--14], Lk. [22:66--68; 23:1--2, 5, 10, 13--14, 18,21, 23--25, 35; 24:19--20, Jn. [18:28,35; 19:14--16 (perh. also 19:11)], Acts [3:13--15,17; 5:30; 7:52], 1 Cor. [1:22--24], and 1 Thes. [2:14--15]; other N.T. books may contain additional instances.
(25 Et respondens universus populus, dixit: Sanguis eius super nos, et super filios nostros).
25And the whole people answering, said: His blood 〈be〉 upon us and upon our children
26Then [...] having scourged Jesus, delivered him unto them to be crucified.
Encyclicals are letters of a more hortatory[*] nature, addressed to all or to a majority of the higher officials of the Church. [....] By Constitution is understood, as in the Middle Ages, a papal document of general authority; [....]
|Holydays of Obligation for the United States|
|1 January||Circumcision||Octav– Nativitat– DNI||Circumcision of Jesus the Christ and (the) Octave Day of Christmas|
|Sunday 46 days after Ash Wednesday||Easter||Dom. Resurrectionis||Resurrection of the Christ from the Dead|
|Thursday 39 days after Easter||Ascension||Ascensio Domini||Ascension of the Christ to Heaven|
|Sunday 49 days after Easter||Pentecost||Dom. Pentecostes||(O.E. “Hwita Sunnandæg”)|
|15 August||Assumption of Our Lady||Assumptionis BMV||Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary into Heaven|
|1 November||All Saints Day||Festum Omnium Sanctorum|
|8 December||Immaculate Conception||Conceptionis Immac. BMV||(Feast of the Patron Saint of the U.S.A.)|
|25 December||Christmas||Nativitas DNI||Birth of Jesus the Christ|
Not only is it not forbidden, but it is permissible and one might say obligatory to pray even publicly for infidel princes, in order that God may grant their subjects peace and prosperity; is more conformable to the tradition of the Church; thus Catholics of the different rites in the Ottoman Empire [before its extinction, would] pray for the sultan.[*]Because the subject word is the religious term for nonChristians, being derived directly from the traditional Latin of Roman Catholicism, the word ought not be used as a label for nonMuslims as disparaged or persecuted from a Muslim perspective. Instead, a word in Arabic, transliterated as “kāfir”, or pl. “kuffār”, ought to be used, because Arabic is the religious language of Islam.[#]
In matters political, Islam is a system of despotism at home and aggression abroad. The Prophet commanded absolute submission to the imâm. In no case was the sword to be raised against him. The rights of non-Moslem subjects are of the vaguest and most limited kind, and a religious war is a sacred duty whenever there is a chance of success against the “Infidel”. Medieval and modern Mohammedan, especially Turkish [†], persecutions of both Jews and Christians are perhaps the best illustration of this fanatical religious and political spirit.[×]It was written from the perspective of the traditional Catholic times of Pope St. Pius X, now more than a century ago. In the 21st century, it would be “politically incorrect” to publish such a harsh summary of the faith whose spokespeople insist is a “religion of peace”. There's evidence that even people professing Catholicism object, perhaps oblivious to their objections revealing them to be modernists.[#]
To complement this article, which was taken from the 1910 Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent recommends a prayerful reading of "Nostra Aetate" from the Second Vatican Council. [emphasis & links added]
[...] teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. [Mt. 28:19--20] [emphasis added]But also Mark:
[...] Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved : but he that believeth not shall be condemned. [Mk. 16:15--16] [emphasis added]Note *: As its formulæ were developed from the First Council of Nicaea, in A.D. 325, through the Council of Constantinople, in A.D. 381. ]
The exclusive attribution of a territory to a parish and its pastor is not absolutely necessary; certain parishes coexist with others in the same territory, the respective parishes being distinguished by rite or nationality, e.g. in the Orient or in large American cities. There are even rare instances of parishes formed solely of families, without regard to territory. [Emphasis added.]The territorial exceptions of Catholic parishes “distinguished by rite” might be even more relevant in the years following Vatican II, during which the majority of bishops have become hostile to celebration of a Latin Mass of any vintage in their dioceses, and in which the Vatican insists that a priest must not say a Latin Mass of any vintage without permission granted by either a motu proprio or a pontifical indult.
InThe text above, if viewed instead in the format in which it'd been printed 4 centuries ago, concludes the rightmost of 3 columns, with a hanging indent (1-em width) beginning each of the sequences of words that are shown above as separated by a blank line, but published translations treat that odd formatting as irrelevant. The page displays mediævalist characteristics of movable type, notably
pſecutione. extrema [^] S.R.E. ſedebit.
Petrus Romanus, qui paſcet oues in multis tribulationibus: quibus tranſactis [†] ciuitas ſepticollis diruetur & Iudex tremēdus iudicabit populum ſuum. Finis.
At the final [^] perThe Catholic Church hasn't been headed by a Bishop of Rome named Peter (or translated equivalent) for nearly 2 millennia, indeed, no one since the Prince of the Apostles. So why would a prophesied pope, one who has never (yet) been elected, be newsworthy? Because the epithet immediately above him on the list is the ambiguous “Gloria oliuæ”, meaning “Glory of the olive”: According to the count that increments with each new pope, “Gloria oliuæ” was Benedict XVI, who abdicated in February 2013.
prosecution of the Holy Roman Church, (there) will sit (as pope) Peter the Roman, who tends (the) sheep in many tribulations; by whose final stroke [†], the city of seven-hills will be demolished, and the fearsome Judge will judge his people. (The) End.
The designation presbyter, it is suggested, may have been given to all those who were recognized as having a claim to some voice in directing the affairs of the community, whether this were based on official status, or social rank, or benefactions to the local Church, or on some other ground; while those presbyters who had received the laying on of hands would be known, not simply as "presbyters", but as “presiding (proistamenoi-- 1 Thes. 5:12[#]) presbyters”, “presbyter-bishops”, “presbyter-rulers” (hegoumenoi--Heb. 13:17[#]).The Latinized word “presbyter-” appears in various places in the Vulgate New Testament, e.g.:
Hic est enim Calix Sanguinis mei, novi et æterni testamenti: mysterium fidei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.In English:
Hæc quotiescúmque fecéritis, in mei memóriam faciétis.[*]
For this is the Chalice of My Blood of the new and eternal covenant: the mystery of faith, which shall be shed for you[#] and for many unto the forgiveness of sins.So far, so good. The issue is that following Vatican II, the prayer was revised to become slightly different in the Novus Ordo. At first glance, it might've seemed to be an insignificant revision: “for many” was replaced by “for all ”. But the change has substantial theological implications. [....]
As often as you shall do these things, in memory of Me shall you do them.[*]
Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation. // This way of acting bids fair to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism [....] (§ 63--64, emphasis added)The Internet-accessible edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia was published many decades before this invention, so aside from various sections of the article listed first below, it's less help than might be hoped:
The subdiaconate [....] is defined as the power by which one ordained as a subdeacon may carry the chalice with wine to the altar, prepare the necessaries for the Eucharist, and read the Epistles before the people. According to the common opinion of theologians at present, the subdeaconship was not instituted by Christ. Nor are there sufficient grounds for maintaining that it had an Apostolic origin. There is no mention of the subdiaconate in Holy Scripture or in the authentic writings of the Apostolic Fathers.Not yet counted among sacred orders during the papacy of Urban II (late 11th century), the subdiaconate was officially declared to be among the major orders--albeit the lowest among them--by Pope Innocent III (early 13th century).
The Council of Trent sat from 1545 to 1563. It debated Catholic dogma on the Mass, and its decrees were confirmed afterward by a pope. For clarity in this discussion, let's call the Mass as stabilized by that council the “Tridentine Mass”.This modernist argument seems to make sense, so what could be wrong with it? After all, right here in the U.S.A., the (U.S.) Articles of Confederation were completely replaced by the (U.S.) Constitution. And the (U.S.) Constitution allows Congress to repeal (U.S.) federal laws that it previously enacted-- even if in a previous session-- and even to initiate repeal of amendments and original provisions of the same (U.S.) Constitution that is the supreme limit on its Congressional powers.
Then 4 centuries passed, and times had certainly changed. Pope John XXIII, who called the 2nd Vatican Council, had (reportedly) told at least 1 writer that “Catholicism stood in need of reform”[*]. The new ecumenical council sat from 1962 to 1965. It debated Catholic dogma on the Mass, and its decrees were confirmed afterward by a pope. For additional clarity in this discussion, let's call the new Mass resulting from the new council the “Novus Ordo Missae”. The modernists insist that the 2nd Vatican Council and all popes from Paul VI to Benedict XVI have authoritatively spoken and must be obeyed by all Roman Catholics. So, the modernist argument concludes, it doesn't matter whether traditional Catholics disparage the “Novus Ordo Missae” as “NewMass” or even “NO Mass”; it's now the Mass for the Roman Catholic Church in modern times. It's every bit as valid sacramentally as the “Tridentine Mass” was for 4 centuries, but it completely replaces it, and gives it a well-earned eternal rest.