"It is I, the accused, who would have to judge you" Bishop Marcel Lefebvre.

 

CHAPTER 3

 

Encyclical Qui pluribus

of Pope Pius IX

in rationalism and other modern errors

 spread by the Masons

(November 9, 1846)

 In his encyclical Qui pluribus, of November 9, 1846, Pope Pius IX provides even more details than his Predecessors regarding the action of Freemasons. It should be noted that this was his first encyclical and it is quite long, which shows how important the Pope treated this issue.

 At first, as later St. Pius X in his first encyclical, he expresses his admiration and apprehensions at the weight of the position he has just received:

 «… We have hardly been placed in the Chair of the Prince of the Apostles, without deserving it, and received the commission, from the Prince of the Shepherds himself, to act as Saint Peter, pasturing and guiding, not only lambs, that is to say, everything the Christian people, but also the sheep, that is, the Prelates» ...

The Pope immediately expresses his desire to address the bishops and faithful:

«… We desire nothing so strongly as to speak to you with the intimate affection of charity. As soon as we take possession of the Supreme Pontificate, as is the custom of Our predecessors, in Our Lateran Basilica, in the year we send you this letter» ... The Pope begins by exposing the situation of the Church at the time of assuming the position of Supreme Pontiff:

 «We know, Venerable Brothers, that in the calamitous times that we live in, men united in perverse society and imbued with unhealthy doctrine, closing their ears to the truth, have unleashed a cruel and fearsome war against everything Catholic, they have scattered and disseminated among the people all kinds of errors, sprouted from falsehood and darkness. We are horrified and it hurts our souls to consider the monstrous errors and the various devices they invent to harm» ... It has been said sometimes that Pius IX, in the first years of his pontificate, was liberal and that later, with the experience of the pontificate, he became very firm and showed himself as an admirable fighter, above all, of course, at the time he published his encyclical Quanta cura and the famous Syllabus, which caused the horror of all progressives and liberals of that time. But that's not true. It is a kind of legend that circulated, but it is false. Pope Pius IX, from his first encyclical, reveals himself as a man of faith, fighter and traditional:

«Because you know, Venerable Brothers, that these enemies of the Christian man, caught up with a blind impetus of mad impiety, come in their recklessness even to teach in public, without feeling ashamed, with unprecedented audacity, opening their mouths and blaspheming God (Rev. 3, 6), that the mysteries of our sacrosanct Religion are stories invented by men, that the Church goes against the welfare of human society, and they even dare to insult Christ and Lord himself. The Pope realizes that the sects condemned for more than a century by his predecessors continue to live and in turn denounces the evil that they continue to perpetrate with their perverse doctrines.

 The error of rationalism

 With a crooked and fallacious argument, they endeavor to proclaim the strength and excellence of human reason, elevating it above the faith of Christ, and boldly shout that faith is opposed to human reason. Nothing so foolish, nor so impious, nor so opposed to the same reason.

 Obviously, deep down the radical vice of these enemies of the Church is to proclaim independent human reason and say that everything that surpasses it and cannot understand, such as mysteries, of course, is inadmissible. "Human reason is preponderant," they say. he has to dominate and he cannot be asked to submit to anyone or anything he cannot understand”.

For this reason, Pope Pius IX affirms the superiority of faith over reason and shows that they cannot contradict each other: "Because even when faith is above reason, there is no opposition or disagreement between them, since both come from the same source of eternal and immutable Truth, God Optimum and Maximum."

 Faith is above reason. Reason, with its natural light, cannot understand the supernatural mysteries that are the object of faith. However, faith is not opposed to reason. Of course, we cannot understand either faith or our mysteries, but our faith in these mysteries is reasonable and based on valid motives: apologetics, and the credibility of those who have taught us what we know, in particular Our Lord Jesus Christ that He has taught us these mysteries.

Why do we believe? By the authority of God, author of revelation, of course; and on a human level, we also have solid reasons to believe. When the Church asks us to believe, it does not ask us for anything contrary to reason. Obviously, He asks us to do an act that is above our reason and that we assert to truths that we cannot understand in this world: the mystery of the Holy Trinity, of the Incarnation, of Redemption, etc.

 If the Church asks us to believe in mysteries, it does not do so in an irrational way, but on the contrary, based on reasons of credibility, such as the miracles of Our Lord and that prove that He was God. As He proved, we have to believe in His words that they come from God and we cannot oppose Him.  Faith not only does not contradict our science, but it is an infinitely higher and greater complement to it, since this knowledge comes to us from God and not simply from our human reason.

 Philosophy at the service of theology

 Saint Thomas Aquinas has said that philosophy is the handmaid of theology, since theological science is much higher than philosophical. Philosophical science has to put itself at the service of theological science in order to show us precisely that theology is in no way opposed to reason, even when it is above human understanding.

But the basic principle of all modern philosophies categorically rejects all revealed truth as imposed. This argument assumes that the understanding, only with the lights of natural reason, can understand all truths.

 Individual reason cannot prove everything

 This concept is not only false when it refers to the truths of faith, but it is also false when it refers to the truths that belong to reason, philosophy and human science. Indeed, how many things do we have to accept without being able to verify? Even if it is said: "Yes, but reason could prove them." Agree. For example: we are taught the principles of philosophy, the evidence of which we cannot always have; and the same is true for all sciences. We cannot redo the reasoning that men have been developing for centuries since science began to take its first steps, since it has been accumulating since men exist, and you cannot know everything or rediscover everything.

 How can you imagine that everyone who is born said: “I don't want anyone to teach me, nor do I want any teacher or teacher; ¿I want to know everything for myself”? It would be impossible. Who can know all the sciences for himself? We are forced to have teachers and to be taught precisely in order to progress much faster in science. If each one had to rediscover all scientific reasoning to find the origin and evolution of all laws, how to get to define this or that philosophical principle or chemical law, no one would succeed.

 Existence of even natural mysteries

 Those who say: “I don't believe anything they tell me; I have to be able to prove it myself”, they are foolish, because by acting in this way nothing could be known. Also in nature there are mysteries. Inevitably the conclusion is reached that there is a God who is the creator of all things and that he has created us.

 For example: philosophy shows that there is a first being, infinitely active, intelligent and powerful, who is called God, who has to be the author of everything we see and are.

 If we want to delve a little into the notion of creation, we realize that it is a great mystery. How can God, author of all creation, create beings that are not Himself but are not outside of Him, since nothing can be outside of God? It's a mystery 4. How to consider human freedom and the omnipotence of God? God, in a way, sustains our free acts in being. We cannot do any free act without God being present. Some are inclined to say that God does everything and, as it were, we are not free; while others claim that man, being free, does everything and that God does not intervene at all. That cannot be, because it would be to pretend that in some acts God is not present, since there is no being and no action is carried out without God giving him what; otherwise, we would be God. If we could do some work alone, without God's intervention, we would be the authors of being, and in that case we could do all beings; but it is not like that, because we cannot do it.It is something that those who do not accept that there are mysteries in nature do not want to admit.

 On the one hand, then, we see that, by apologetics, reason demonstrates the natural foundations of faith and that in turn faith enlightens us even with regard to simply natural mysteries. As Pope Pius IX says, faith and reason not only do not oppose each other, but: “in such a way they help each other, that right reason demonstrates, confirms and defends the truths of faith; and faith frees reason from errors, illustrates, confirms and perfects it with the knowledge of divine truths.

 As other rationalists appeal to the indefinite progress of human reason against the supremacy of faith and against the immutability of the truths of faith, the Pope also condemns them: «With no less daring and deceit, Venerable Brothers, these enemies of revelation, they exalt human progress and, recklessly and sacrilegiously, they would like to confront it with the Catholic Religion as if Religion were not the work of God but of men or some philosophical invention that is perfected with human methods ».

 The Pope then specifies his refutation of what, later, was to be called semi-rationalism: «Our most holy Religion was not invented by human reason, but most mercifully manifested to men by God. It is easily understood that this Religion has to draw its strength from the authority of God himself, and that, therefore, it cannot be deduced from reason or perfected by it. "