The Oath Against Modernism
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.
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius10/p10moath.htm
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius10/p10moath.htm
One of the big problems that many of our evangelical brothers and sisters have with the Catholic Church is that it appears to have and endless number of traditions that seem to get in the way of the simple word of God in the Scriptures. In addition to this, Catholics uphold the Teaching authority of the Church (“Magisterium” being the Latin word for this) which seems to compete with the authority of the Bible. Interesting enough, though prior Church Councils such as Trent (16th century) had affirmed the importance of extra-biblical traditions and the teaching authority of the Church, no official document had ever really attempted to explain the exact nature of Tradition and Magisterium and how they relate to Scripture. The fathers of the Second Vatican Council, understanding the strategic importance of this issue, were determined to address all this in Dei Verbum, their Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation.
Those soi disant traditionalists who reject Vatican Two entirely and/or describe it as a heretical council or merely a pastoral council * appear to have been blinded to the fact that the council produced legitimate developments of doctrine and this is one example.
And we know it is a legitimate development of Doctrine for at least two reasons:
1. It defined that which had heretofore not been officially defined by the Magisterium
2. Mons. Marcel Lefebvre signed this document and owing to the reality so many soi disant traditionalists consider him to be the apotheosis of Tradition, it means that Dei Verbum is perfectly a part of Tradition as a legitimate development of Doctrine.
Still, it remains a sad irony that those bemoaning the death of The Oath Against Modernism (ABS is in favor of its reinstitution) could not honestly swear the Oath because they reject the very first sentence of the Oath.
* There is not one thing wrong with a pastoral approach to anything but many soi disant trads have made of it a monstrous entity and, in another sad irony, it is they who have changed the definition of a perfectly acceptable word denoting a perfectly acceptable praxis and making it sound as though it were a form of Satanic Marxism.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14611a.htm
And we know it is a legitimate development of Doctrine for at least two reasons:
1. It defined that which had heretofore not been officially defined by the Magisterium
2. Mons. Marcel Lefebvre signed this document and owing to the reality so many soi disant traditionalists consider him to be the apotheosis of Tradition, it means that Dei Verbum is perfectly a part of Tradition as a legitimate development of Doctrine.
Still, it remains a sad irony that those bemoaning the death of The Oath Against Modernism (ABS is in favor of its reinstitution) could not honestly swear the Oath because they reject the very first sentence of the Oath.
* There is not one thing wrong with a pastoral approach to anything but many soi disant trads have made of it a monstrous entity and, in another sad irony, it is they who have changed the definition of a perfectly acceptable word denoting a perfectly acceptable praxis and making it sound as though it were a form of Satanic Marxism.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14611a.htm