Partisans of Error

Partisans of Error: St. Pius X
Against the Modernists,
Michael Davies (The Neumann
Press, 1983).

MR. MICHAEL DAVIES has put us in his debt once more with a masterly little study. The subject is Modernism: what it was (and is), and how an early manifestation of it within the Church was dealt with by Pope St. Pius X.

I have called this book "little." In size it is indeed that (a mere one hundred pages), but in scope it is admirably comprehensive. There are twenty-two short chapters ranging over the entire spectrum of the problem, from the nature of the truths under attack to the often unsavory character of the attackers themselves.

The first eight chapters provide the careful reader not only with definitions of the principal truths of the Faith which the Modernists saw fit to disdain, but also thereby with armaments useful against the neo-Modemists who oppress us (as much by their ignorance as by their cruelty) today.

Thus in briefly describing the exact nature of the Church's Magisterium (pp. 21-22) Mr. Davies prepares the ground for his own refutation of Modernist falsehoods concerning the development of doctrine and the role of the laity in the Church. But he also equally well prepares the reader to recognize and refute similar errors when he comes across them, as he surely will either from the pulpit, in his local "Catholic" paper, or perhaps from the innocent mouths of his own indoctrinated children. A clear realization that "the voice of the Magisterium is ... represented by the universal episcopate, when all the bishops of the world are united on a point of doctrine among themselves and with the Bishop of Rome," is useful these days, when at least one national hierarchy presents its acceptance of unilateral nuclear disarmament as the authentic voice of the Teaching Church. It need hardly be said that these are the same people who refuse genuinely authentic Magisterial teaching (remember Humanae Vitae) under the specious plea of "freedom of conscience."

The following five chapters discuss the origins and development of Modernism, with special attention being given to George Tyrell and Alfred Loisy. The tale is not a pleasant one, as in general these men were neither the attractive personalities nor the intellectual giants they so fondly assumed themselves to be. An especially illuminating story has Baron von Huegel and a number of his initiates viewing the procession of the Blessed Sacrament during the London-based International Eucharistic Congress of 1908. Pityingly, from their comfortable perch above the throng, they commented wittily upon the superstitious practices of popular religion. Their whole inspiration was to see an end to such actions by destroying the intellectual respectability of the beliefs which prompted them. That these beliefs were (and remain) dogmas of the Catholic Faith seems to have exercised their consciences but little.

It was part of their self-imposed task to show the "time-conditioned" nature of much (and increasingly of all) that makes up the deposit of Faith. While conspicuously unsuccessful, at least during their own lifetimes, with the Church as a whole, they succeeded admirably with themselves. It is hard to know what they believed at the end, but Loisy at least was frank: "I have not been a Catholic in the official sense of the word for a long time ... Roman Catholicism as such is destined to perish, and it will deserve no regrets." Frank with himself at least, but not with the Church: at roughly the same time that he confided the above to his diary, he wrote as follows to Cardinal Merry del Val: "I accept all the dogmas of the Church." Such hypocrisy is typical of the Modernist spirit, and follows logically from their conviction of superiority over the mass of Catholics. Their vision, they thought, the result of superior sensibility, was the true one, and could thus be furthered by prevarication, deception, and outright lies. The photograph of Father Loisy reproduced in this book shows all too clearly the face of a man consumed by pride and its inevitable companion, hatred.

Mr. Davies' book ends triumphantly with the characteristically decisive actions of St. Pius X: publication of the Encyclical Pascendi¹ and the decree Lamentabili, doctrinal and disciplinary measures against the worst offenders, and, in 1910, the motu proprio Sacrorum antistitum promulgating the anti-Modernist oath. This oath was taken by all priests, at important stages of their training and careers, from that date until abolished after the Council by Paul VI. We know all too well now just how many perjurers there were among them.

Lamentabili and the anti-Modernist oath are reproduced here in appendices. A further appendix gives an interesting account of Father Tyrell's last days, during which, excommunicated, he expressed a desire for the sacraments but refused to recant his errors. A number of letters from his friend and biographer, Miss Maude Petre, allow us no doubt on that score. They are here published for the first time, and alone give this work a special value in the literature of Modernism.

The Modernist crisis facing St. Pius X was far deeper than most historians have been willing to admit. Striking evidence for this is to be found in the diaries of Ludwig von Pastor (1854-1928), historian of the Popes, and close friend to many, especially St. Pius X. These diaries were published in 1950. Their 950 pages have been largely ignored, I suspect because their message is unpalatable. And that message is that the spirit of the Modernist revolt permeated the countries of Northern Europe (and France as well) long before 1903.

Especially in Germany, the attitude of a great and growing number of priests and bishops, especially in university circles, was one of bitter resentment of Rome and increasing impatience with traditional ways of expressing the Faith. Language we hear today was anything but uncommon in the Central European episcopal chanceries of one hundred years ago. Sadly, the diplomatically trained Leo XIII did not merely neglect this situation, but in some cases actually encouraged it, not least by his refusal of hard measures. The sinister role played by his Secretary of State, Cardinal Rampolla, is made clear on page after page. The Hapsburgs, in vetoing his election to the papacy after Leo's death, performed perhaps the last of their many great services to the Catholic religion.

By the mercy of God it was Cardinal Sarto who ascended the papal throne at that crucial moment. He, at least, was under no illusions: the rot was far advanced; firm, even harsh measure were essential. After surrounding himself with holy and fearless men, of whom Cardinal Merry del Val was only the most conspicuous, he acted with decision and effect. A reading of Michael Davies' book will fill in the details.

It is the fashion among milk-and-water Catholics to deplore the methods used against the Modernists during St. Pius X's reign and to insist that he, being a saint, could not have known of them.

The facts are otherwise. St. Pius knew all about the methods being used, approved of them, and in some cases even originated them. Why is this so shocking to the weak of heart? What, after all, is sanctity in a Pope? It is not simply piety, charity and goodness as personal qualities, even to an heroic degree. A sainted Pope, rather, must be holy as Pope, charitable as Pope, pious as Pope, That is, he must be heroic as effective guardian and teacher of the deposit of Faith. A failure here on the part of the Pope is a failure precisely of charity since for him the highest exercise of charity must involve a faithful fulfillment of Christ's command to Peter; "Feed my lambs, feed my sheep."

To do that, in times of crisis and attack, mere words are not enough. Action must follow; swift, sure and effective. St. Pius X, knowing this, neither pulled back himself, nor deserted those who fought at his side.

One of these was Msgr. Umberto Benigni. He was much attacked for his indefatigable and effective campaign against the Modernists; indeed, he was later to suffer under the less robust pontificate of Benedict XV. But St. Pius X never ceased to defend him, saying at one point: "Benigni fights justly." This in 1912, when the monsignor was already attacked from all sides as an "Integrist." Pius later expressed his approval of the "Integral" Catholics time and time again. Criticism of their methods, he saw, was no more than a feint, an attempt to turn papal attention elsewhere as the scent grew warm. It was a tactic which was to succeed with Benedict XV, but Pius was not fooled. In May of 1914, Pastor could write after an audience, "Now as before, the Pope wants integral Catholicism" and again, "The allocution of May 27, 1914, is a clear warning to those bishops who have spoken against the integral Catholics."

Such were the desires and preococupations of the Society of St. Pius X's patron at the very end of his life. Documents of the calibre of Pascendi must not be dismissed as of merely historical significance. They are of a burning actuality. Buy these books; more important, read them and take their message to heart. The same enemy that St. Pius X fought is our enemy today; he knew then how to defeat them; armed with his weapons, and let sanctity be the chief of them, we cannot fail to do the same today.

1. Now re-published as companion volume to that under review.