THE AUTHORITY Of

THE CHURCH
\

IN TEMPORAL MATTERS

His Holiness Pope Pius XII

Tioo addresses given by the Holy Father to the

Cardinals, Archbishops and Bishops present in

Rome (I) for the canonization of St. Pins X on

May 31, 1954 and (2) for ceremonies in honor

of Our Lady on November 2, 1954.

NATIONAL CATHOLIC WELFARE CONFERENCE

1312 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. • Washington 5, D. C.



Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2016

https://archive.org/details/authorityofchurccath



Address of May 31, 1954

Venerable Brothers:

1. “If you love . . . feed”. These words which are a com-

mand of our Divine Redeemer to the Apostle Peter are the
commencement of the Mass in honor of one or more Su-

preme Pontiffs. They show clearly the meaning of apostolic

labor, its exalted virtue, and the reason for its merit.

2. Jesus Christ is the eternal High Priest and Shepherd of

souls. Who taught, labored and suffered greatly for our
sakes. Pius X, Bishop of Rome, whom it has been Our
great joy to enroll in the list of the Saints, following

closely in the footsteps of his Divine Master, took that

command from the lips of Christ and strenuously fulfilled

it : he loved and fed. He loved Christ and fed his flock. He
drew abundantly on the heavenly treasures which our

merciful Redeemer brought to the earth, and distributed

them bountifully to the flock: namely, the nourishment of

truth, heavenly mysteries, the munificent grace of the

Eucharistic sacrament and sacrifice, charity, earnestness in

governing, fortitude in defense. He gave fully of himself
and of those things which the Author and Giver of all good

things had bestowed on him.

3. Your presence in Rome, venerable brothers, and par-

ticipation in these solemn celebrations, gladdens Us. You
have come in order that in union with Us you may pay a
tribute of admiration and honor to a Bishop of the City of

Rome whose life was the glory of the entire Church; and
to give thanks to Almighty God for those whom His pa-
ternal mercy, with a great abundance of favors, guides to

salvation through this Pontiff.

4. And now, beloved brothers, as We stand among you
gathered together from all parts of the world. Our heart
is overjoyed—We, that is, the Vicar of Christ, one who is
also an “ancient” among you “the ancients.” What We have
to say to you. We wish to sum up first of all in words taken
from the letter, which We have just quoted, of the first Su-
preme Pontiff and Prince of the Apostles himself: “The
ancients therefore that are among you, I beseech, who am
myself also an ancient and witness of the sufferings of
Christ . . . feed the flock of God which is among you, taking
care of it not by constraint, but willingly according to God
. . . being made a pattern of the flock from the heart”
(cf. I. Pet. 5, 1-3). These words have the same purport as

1



the Divine utterance: “If you love . . . feed!”, encouraging

pastors to active charity in their ministry.

5. We wish to develop briefly what We have just summed
up in the words of Blessed Peter.

6. Care of all the Church, and the daily vigilance which

Our supreme office demands of Us, compel Us to consider
and weigh certain ideas, sentiments, and ways of acting.

We draw your attention to them, and ask you to unite your
vigilant care with Ours, in order thus to provide more
quickly and effectively for the needs of Christ's flock. There

are evident the symptoms and effects of a certain spiritual

contagion, which require your pastoral care, in order that

they may not spread, but may be remedied in time and
extirpated.

7. Our purpose will be best effected by explaining the triple

office and privilege, which by divine institution belongs to

you, the successors of the Apostles, under the authority of

the Roman Pontiff (cf. can. 329) : namely, of teacher,
priest, and ruler. But since time will not permit today. We
will limit Ourselves to the first point, putting the others

off to another occasion, if God so permits.

8. Christ Our Lord entrusted the truth which He had
brought from heaven to the Apostles, and through them

to their successors. He sent His Apostles, as He had been
sent by the Father (Jn. 20, 21), to teach all nations every-

thing they had heard from Him (cf. Matt. 28, 19-20). The
Apostles are, therefore, by divine right the true doctors

and teachers in the Church. Besides the lawful successors

of the Apostles, namely the Roman Pontiff for the universal
Church and Bishops for the faithful entrusted to their

care (cf. can. 1326), there are no other teachers divinely

constituted in the CJhurch of Christ.

9. But both the Bishops and, first of all, the Supreme

Teacher and Vicar of Christ on earth, may associate others
with themselves in their work of teacher, and use their

advice; they delegate to them the faculty to teach, either

by special grant, or by conferring an office to which the

faculty is attached (cf. can. 1328). Those who are so
called, teach not in their own name, nor by reason of their
theological knowledge, but by reason of the mandate which

they have received from the lawful teaching authority.

Their faculty always remains subject to that authority,

nor is it ever exercised in its own right or independently.

2



10. Bishops, for their part, by conferring this faculty are

not deprived of the right to teach; they retain the very

grave obligation of supervising the doctrine which others

propose, in order to help them, and of seeing to its integrity

and security.

11. Therefore, the legitimate teaching authority of the

Church is guilty of no injury or no offense to any of those

to whom it has given a canonical mission, if it desires to
ascertain what they, to whom it has entrusted the mission
of teaching, are proposing and defending in their lectures,

in books, notes and reviews intended for the use of their

students, as well as in books and other publications in-

tended for the general public.

12. In order to accomplish this. We do not contemplate ex-
tending the prescription of canon law on previous censor-

ship of books to include all these kinds of teaching; for

there are many ways and means at hand for investigating
and acquiring accurate information on what professors are

teaching.

13. And this care and prudence of the legitimate teaching
authority does not at all imply distrust or suspicion, (nor

does the profession of faith which the Church requires of

professors and many others; cf. Can. 1406, n. 7 and 8)
on the contrary, the fact that the office of teacher has been

bestowed implies confidence, high regard and honor shown

the person to whom the office has been entrusted.

14. Indeed, the Holy See, whenever it inquires and wishes

to be informed about what is being taught in various sem-
inaries, colleges, universities and institutions of higher

learning, in those fields which pertain to its jurisdiction,

is led by no other motive than the consciousness of Christ’s

mandate and the obligation by which she is bound before

God to safeguard and preserve without corruption or adul-
teration sound doctrine. Moreover, the exercise of this

vigilance aims also at protecting and upholding your right

and office of feeding with the genuine teaching of Christ

and with His truth the fiock entrusted to your pastoral care.

15. Not without serious reason. Venerable Brothers, have
We wished to recall these things in your presence. For,
unfortunately, it has happened that certain teachers care
little for conformity with the living teaching authority of

the Church, pay little heed to her commonly received doc-
trine clearly proposed in various ways; and at the same

3



time they follow their own bent too much, and regard too
highly the intellectual temper of more recent writers, and

the standards of other branches of learning, which they

declare and hold to be the only ones which conform to sound

ideas and standards of scholarship.

16. Of course, the Church is very keen for and fosters the

study of human branches of learning and their progress;
she honors with special favor and regard learned men who
spend their lives in the cultivation of learning. However,

matters of religion and morals, because they completely

transcend truths of the senses and the plane of the material,

pertain solely to the office and authority of the Church.

17. In Our encyclical letter, Humani Generis, We de-
scribed the attitude of mind, the spirit, of those whom We
have referred to above. We also recalled to mind that some
of the aberrations from the truth which We repudiated
in that Encyclical had their direct origin in a neglect of

conformity with the living teaching authority of the Church.

18. Time and again, St. Pius X, in writings whose import-

ance is known to all of you, urgently stressed the need
for this union with the mind and teaching of the Church.

His successor in the Supreme Pontificate, Benedict XV, did

the same. In his first Encyclical (Ad Beatissimi Apostolo-

rum Principis, Nov. 1, 1914), after solemnly repeating
Pius’ condemnation of Modernism, he thus describes the

attitude of mind of followers of that doctrine: “He who is
infiuenced by its principles disdainfully spurns whatever

appears old, and eagerly pursues the new : in his manner of

speaking of divine things, in performance of divine wor-

ship, in Catholic usages, even in private devotions” (AAS,

VI, 1914, p. 578).

19. And if there are any present-day teachers making every
effort to produce and develop new ideas, but not to repeat

“that which has been handed down,” and if this is their

whole aim, they should reflect calmly on those words which

Benedict XV, in the Encyclical just referred to, proposes
for their consideration: “We wish this maxim of our
elders held in reverence: Nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum

est (Let nothing new be introduced but only what has been
handed down)

;
it must be held as an inviolable law in

matters of faith, and should also control those points which

allow of change, though in these latter for the most part

4



the rule holds: Non nova sed noviter (Not new things but

in a new way).’'

20. As for the laity, it is clear that they can be invited by

legitimate teachers and accepted as helpers in the defense

of the faith. It is enough to call to mind the thousands of

men and women engaged in catechetical work and other
types of lay apostolate, all of which are highly praiseworthy

and can be strenuously promoted. But all these lay apostles

must be, and remain, under the authority, leadership and

watchfulness of those who by divine institution are set up

as teachers of Christ’s Church. In matters involving the

salvation of souls, there is no teaching authority in the

Church not subject to this authority and vigilance.

21. Recently what is called “lay theology” has sprung up

and spread to various places, and a new class of “lay the-
ologian” has emerged, which claims to be sui juris. There

are professors of this theology occupying established chairs,

courses are given, notes published, seminars held. These

professors distinguish their teaching authority from, and

in a certain way set it up against the public teaching au-
thority of the Church. At times, in order to justify their

position, they appeal to the charismatic gifts of teaching

and of interpreting prophecy, which are mentioned more

than once in the New Testament, especially in the Pauline
Epistles (e.g. Rom. 12, 6-7 ; I Cor. 12, 28-30). They appeal
to history, which from the beginning of the Christian re-

ligion down to today presents so many names of laymen
who for the good of souls have taught the truth of Christ
orally and in writing, though not called to this by the

Bishops and without having asked or received the sacred

teaching authority, led on by their own inward impulse
and apostolic zeal.

22. Nevertheless, it is necessary to maintain to the con-

trary that there never has been, there is not now, and there

never will be in the Church a legitimate teaching author-

ity of the laity withdrawn by God from the authority,
guidance and watchfulness of the sacred teaching author-

ity, In fact, the very denial of submission offers a convinc-

ing proof and criterion that laymen who thus speak and
act are not guided by the Spirit of God and of Christ.

23. Furthermore, everyone can see how great a danger of
confusion and error there is in this “lay theology”; a
danger also lest others begin to be taught by men clearly

5



unfitted for the task, or even by deceitful and fraudulent

men, whom St. Paul described: “The time will come when
men . . . always itching to hear something fresh, will pro-
vide themselves with a continuous succession of new teach-
ers, as the whim takes them, turning a deaf ear to the
truth, bestowing their attention on fables instead” (cf.

II Tim. 4, 3-4).

24. Far be it from Us by this admonition to turn away
from a deeper study and dissemination of sacred doctrine

those men, of whatsoever class or group, who are inspired
to it by such a noble zeal.

25. With daily increasing diligence. Venerable Brothers, as
both the duty and the privilege of your office demand of
you, devote yourselves to searching and penetrating more

and more into the sublimity and profundity of supernatural

truth, whose exponents you are by right, and with eloquence

inflamed by zeal make known the holy truths of religion to
those who at the present time, not without the threat of
extremely grave dangers, are being engulfed by the dark-

ness of error in matters of both mind and heart. And thus
through salutary penance and rectitude of affection men
may at last return to God, “to turn away from Whom is to
fall; to turn toward Whom is to rise again; to remain in
Whom is to stand firm; ... to return to Whom is to come
to life again; to dwell in Whom is to live” (St. Aug. Solilo-
quiorum, lib. I, 3, Migne P. L., tom. 32, col. 870).

26. In order that you may accomplish this. We call down
heaven’s help upon you; and that it may be poured out in
abundance, with great affection We impart to you and to
your flocks the Apostolic Blessing.

Address of Nov. 2, 1954

1. “Magnify the Lord with me; together let us extol His

name” (Ps. 33, 4), for by a new favor from Heaven has

Our desire been fulfilled, and at the same time We rejoice
at the sight of you, beloved sons and venerable brothers,

gathered before Us in such large numbers. And the con-
sideration of the new liturgical feast of Mary, Mother of

God and Queen of Heaven and Earth, which We just re-
cently solemnly proclaimed, swells Our holy joy; for it is

only fitting for her children to rejoice when they see an in-

crease of honor accorded their mother.

6



2. Yet, though she is Queen of all, the Blessed Virgin Mary
rules over you, and your plans and undertakings, by a spe-

cial title and in a more intimate way, for she has long

been invoked under that singular and glorious title of

Queen of the Apostles. For, being the mother of fair love,

and of fear, and of knowledge, and of holy hope (cf. Ecclus.

24, 24), what does she desire more eagerly, and strive for

more earnestly, than that the authentic worship of the true

God be ever more deeply implanted in souls, a more genuine

charity glow in them, a pure fear of God rule their plans,

a hope, solidly based on the promise of immortality, be a

solace in this sad exile on earth? All these virtues are being

cultivated among men through the labors and efforts you
expend on your apostolic tasks, so that, leading their

earthly lives in sobriety, justice and piety, they may win
everlasting happiness in heaven. It is, therefore, under the

guidance and protection of Mary, ever Virgin, Mother and

our Queen, that We decided to treat some points, which. We
trust, will prove helpful to you and to the work you are

devotedly engaged in of tending the Lord’s harvest.

3. At the beginning of June, on the occasion of the canon-

ization of St. Pius X, We spoke to the large group of
Bishops who had come to Rome to honor the new Pope-
Saint. Our topic was that teaching office which by divine

institution and right belongs to the successors of the Apos-

tles, under the authority of the Roman Pontiff. Now con-
tinuing that address, as it were. We are pleased to speak
to you of two other closely related functions which concern

you and demand your thought and care—the priesthood,
and the government of the Church. Let Us turn Our
thoughts once more to St. Pius X.

4. From the story of his life We know what the altar and
the Sacrifice of the Mass meant to him, from the very day

on which he first offered the Holy Sacrifice to God, a newly

ordained priest pronouncing for the first time with trembl-

ing lips “Introibo ad altare Dei.” It was the same through-

out his priestly life, as pastor, as spiritual director of a

seminary, as Bishop, as Cardinal-Patriarch, finally as Su-

preme Pontiff. The altar and the Mass were the source

and very center of his piety, his repose and strength in

labors and difficulties, the source of light, courage, unflag-

ging zeal for God’s glory and the salvation of souls. This

Pontiff, just as he was and is a model teacher, was and is
a model priest.

7



5. The particular and chief duty of the priest has ever

been "‘to offer sacrifice”; where there is no true power to

offer sacrifice, there is no true priesthood.

6. This is also perfectly true of the priest of the New Law.
His chief power and duty is to offer the unique and divine

sacrifice of the most High Eternal Priest, Jesus Christ Our

Lord, which Our Divine Redeemer offered in a bloody man-

ner on the Cross, and anticipated in an unbloody man-

ner at the Last Supper. He wished it to be constantly re-
peated, for He commanded His Apostles: “Do this in re-
membrance of Me” (Luke, 22, 19). The Apostles, therefore,
and not all the faithful, did Christ ordain and appoint

priests
;
to them He gave the power to offer sacrifice. Con-

cerning this noble duty of offering the sacrifice of the New
Law, the Council of Trent taught : “In this divine sacrifice

which takes place at Mass, the same Christ is present and

is immolated in an unbloody manner. Who once on the
Cross offered Himself in a bloody manner. For the victim

is one and the same, now offering through the ministry of
priests, Who then offered Himself on the Cross; only the
manner of offering is different” (Session XXII, cap. 2 -

Denzinger, n. 940). Thus the priest-celebrant, putting on

the person of Christ, alone offers sacrifice, and not the peo-

ple, nor clerics, nor even priests who reverently assist. All,
however, can and should take an active part in the Sacrifice.

“The Christian people, though participating in the Euchar-

istic Sacrifice, do not thereby possess a priestly power,” We
stated in the Encyclical Mediator Dei (AAS, vol 39, 1947,

p. 553).

7. We realize, venerable brothers, that what We have just
said is quite familiar to you; yet We wished to recall it,
since it is the basis of, and motive for, what We are about
to say. For there are some who have not ceased claiming

a certain true power to offer sacrifice on the part of all,

even laymen, who piously assist at the sacrifice of the Mass.
Opposing them. We must distinguish truth from error, and
do away with all confusion. Seven years ago, in the same

Encyclical We just quoted. We reproved the error of those
who did not hesitate to state that Christ’s command, “do
this in remembrance of Me,” “refers directly to the entire

assembly of the faithful, and only afterwards did a hier-

archial priesthood follow. Hence, they say, the people

possess a true sacerdotal power, the priest acts only on an

authority delegated by the community. Wherefore they

8



think that ‘concelebration’ is the true Eucharistic sacrifice,

and that it is more fitting for priests and people together to

'concelebrate’ than to offer the Sacrifice in private, with

no congregation present.” We also recalled to mind, in that
Encyclical, in what sense the celebrating priest can be said

“to take the place of the people”; namely “because he

bears the person of Jesus Christ our Lord, Who is the head
of all the Members, and offers Himself for them; thus the

priest goes to the altar as a minister of Christ, subordinate

to Christ, but ranking above the people. The people, how-

ever, since in no way do they bear the person of our Divine
Redeemer, and are not mediators between themselves and

God, cannot in any way share in sacerdotal rights.” (AAS,

1947, pp. 553, 554).

8. In considering this matter, it is not only a question of

measuring the fruit that is derived from the hearing or

offering of the Eucharistic sacrifice—it is indeed possible
that one derive more fruit from a Mass devoutly and relig-

iously heard than from a Mass celebrated with casual

negligence—but of establishing the nature of the act of
hearing and celebrating Mass, from which the other fruits

of the sacrifice flow. Omitting any mention of the acts of

worship of God, and thanksgiving to Him, We refer to
those fruits of propitiation and impetration on behalf of

those from whom the Sacrifice is offered, even though they
are not present

;
likewise the fruits “for the sins, penalties,

satisfactions and other needs of the faithful still alive, as

well as for those who have died in Christ, but are not yet
fully purified.” {Cone. Trid. Sess. XXII cap. 2 - Denzinger
n 940). When the matter is thus regarded, an assertion
which is being made today, not only by laymen but also
at times by certain theologians and priests and spread about

by them, ought to be rejected as an erroneous opinion:

namely, that the offering of one Mass, at which a hundred

priests assist with religious devotion, is the same as a

hundred Masses celebrated by a hundred priests. That is

not true. With regard to the offering of the Eucharistic

sacrifice, the actions of Christ, the High Priest, are as

many as are the priests celebrating not as many as are the
priests reverently hearing the Mass of a Bishop or a priest

;

for those present at the Mass in no sense sustain, or act
in, the person of Christ sacrificing, but are to be compared

to the faithful layfolk who are present at the Mass.

9. On the other hand, it should not be denied or called in

9



question that the faithful have a kind of '‘priesthood/’ and

one may not depreciate or minimize it. For the Prince of
the Apostles, in his first Letter, addressing the faithful,

uses these words: "You, however, are a chosen race, a

royal priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people” (/ Pet.

2, 9) ; and just before this, he asserts that the faithful

possess "a holy priesthoood, to offer spiritual sacrifices,

acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (ibid. 2, 5). But

whatever is the full meaning of this honorable title and

claim, it must be firmly held that the "priesthood” common
to all the faithful, high and reserved as it is, differs not

only in degree, but in essence also, from priesthood fully

and properly so called, which lies in the power of offering

the sacrifice of Christ Himself, since he bears the person of

Christ, the supreme High Priest.

10. We note with joy that in many dioceses there have
sprung up special liturgical institutes, that liturgical groups

have been established, that moderators to promote interest

in the liturgy have been nominated, that diocesan or inter-

diocesan rallies on liturgical matters have been held, and

gatherings have been held, or will be organized, on an in-

ternational level. We are happy to hear that, in some
places, the Bishops were present in person and presided at

these gatherings. These meetings sometimes follow a def-

inite program, viz., only one offers the Mass, and others

(all or the majority) assist at this one Mass, and receive

the Holy Eucharist during it from the hands of the cele-

brant. If this be done for a good and sound reason, and

the Bishop, to avoid scandal among the faithful, has made
no contrary decision, the practice is not to be opposed,

so long as the error We have mentioned above is not under-
lying it. Then, with regard to the matters dealt with at

these gatherings, there are discussions on points of history,

doctrine and the conduct of life
;
conclusions have been ar-

rived at and motions drawn up which seem necessary or

in keeping with greater progress in this study, but subject

to the decision of proper ecclesiastical authority. But this

movement to study the sacred liturgy does not stop at the

holding of these gatherings; alongside them continually

grow and develop experience and practice, so that the

faithful, in ever greater numbers, are being influenced to

an active union and communion with the priest who is
carrying out the sacrifice.

11. But, venerable brothers, however you show favor

—

10



and rightly—to the practice and development of the sacred
liturgy, do not allow those studying this subject in your

dioceses to withdraw from your guidance and watchfulness,

or to adapt and change the sacred liturgy according to their

own judgment, contrary to the Church’s clearly declared
norms: “It is the function of the Apostolic See alone to

determine the sacred liturgy and to approve liturgical

books” (can. 1257), and particularly with regard to the

celebration of Mass: “All other custom to the contrary

being revoked, a priest celebrating must observe accurately

and devoutly the rubrics of the books of his own rite, and
take care not to add other ceremonies or prayers at his own
whim” (can. 818). And do you give no consent or permis-
sion to attempts of this kind, or to movements which are

more daring than prudent.

12. “Being made a pattern to the flock” (7 Pet. 5, 3) : the
words of St. Peter especially refer to Bishops, as having,

and exercising, the office of shepherd. The special and per-

sonal note of the Pontificate of Pius X was indeed this
aspect and habit of “Shepherd.” To put it briefly, after he
reached the highest office in the apostolic ministry, it was
clear to all that there had been raised to the Chair of the

Prince of the Apostles a priest who had grown up in the
care of souls, who had been from the beginning of his
priesthood, and who continued to be a shepherd of souls,
until he was set to feed the whole flock of Christ. The un-
varying principle which he kept in his action, the aim of

life which he set himself, was “salvation of souls.” If he
desired to “renew all in Christ,” it was a desire for the
sake of the salvation of souls. To this end and function
he, in some way, subordinated all his actions. He was the
good shepherd in the midst of his flock, anxious about its

needs, troubled by the dangers threatening it, entirely de-

voted to the leading and guiding of the flock of Christ in

the way of Christ.

13. But it is not our present purpose, venerable brothers,

while We are addressing you, shepherds of your flocks, to
sketch again a noble image and perfect pattern from the
saintly Pontiff and shepherd. We wish rather—as We did
with

^

the teaching power and priesthood of Bishops—^to
mention some points which, especially in Our times, demand
the interest, voice and activity of a dedicated shepherd.

14. And first, there are some noticeable attitudes and ten-
dencies of mind which presume to check and set limits to

11



the power of Bishops (the Roman Pontiff not excepted)
,
as

being strictly the shepherds of the flock entrusted to them.

They fix their authority, office and watchfulness within cer-

tain bounds, which concern strictly religious matters, the

statement of the truths of the faith, the regulation of de-

votional practices, administration of the Sacraments of the

Church, and the carrying out of liturgical ceremonies. They

wish to restrain the Church from all undertakings and

business which concern life as it is really conducted

—

“the realities of life,” as they say. In short, this way of
thinking in the official statements of some lay Catholics,

even those in high positions, is sometimes shown when they

say: “We are perfectly willing to see, to listen to, and to
approach Bishops and priests in their Churches, and re-

garding matters within their authority; but in places of

official and public business, where matters of this life are

dealt with and decided, we have no wish to see them or to
listen to what they say. For there, it is we laymen, and
not the clergy—no matter of what rank or qualification

—

who are the legitimate judges.”

15. We must take an open and firm stand against errors
of this kind. The power of the Church is not bound by the

limits of “matters strictly religious.” as they say, but the

whole matter of the natural law, its foundation, its inter-

pretation, its application, so far as their moral aspects ex-

tend, are within the Church’s power. For the keeping of

the natural law, by God’s appointment, has reference to

the road by which man has to approach his supernatural
end. But, on this road, the Church is man’s guide and

guardian in what concerns his supreme end. The Apostles

observed this in times past, and afterwards, from the

earliest centuries, the Church has kept to this manner of
acting, and keeps to it today, not indeed like some private

guide or adviser, but by virtue of the Lord’s command and
authority. Therefore, when it is a question of instructions
and propositions which the properly constituted shepherds

(i.e. the Roman Pontiff for the whole Church and the
Bishops for the faithful entrusted to them) publish on

matters within the natural law, the faithful must not invoke

that saying (which is wont to be employed with respect to

opinions of individuals) : “the strength of the authority

is no more than the strength of the arguments.” Hence,

even though to someone, certain declarations of the Church

may not seem proved by the arguments put forward, his

12



obligation to obey still remains. This was the mind, and

these are the words of St. Pius X in his Encyclical Letter
Singulari Quadam of September 24, 1912 {AAS, vol. 4,
1912, p. 658) : “Whatever a Christian man may do, even in
affairs of this world, he may not ignore the supernatural,
nay, he must direct all to the highest good as to his last

end, in accordance with the dictates of Christian wisdom;

but all his actions, in so far as they are morally good or

evil, that is, agree with, or are in opposition to, divine

and natural law, are subject to the judgment and authority

of the Church.” And he immediately transfers this princi-
ple to the social sphere: “The social question and the con-

troversies underlying that question . . . are not merely of

an economic nature, and consequently such as can be set-

tled while the Church’s authority is ignored, since, on the

contrary, it is most certain that it (the social question) is

primarily a moral and religious one, and on that account

must be settled chiefly in accordance with the moral law

and judgment based on religion.” (ibid., pp. 658, 659).

16. Many and serious are the problems in the social field

—

whether they be merely social or socio-political, they per-

tain to the moral order, are of concern to conscience and

the salvation of men
;
thus they cannot be declared outside

the authority and care of the Church. Indeed, there are

problems outside the social field, not strictly “religious,”

political problems, of concern either to individual nations,

or to all nations, which belong to the moral order, weigh on

the conscience and can, and very often do, hinder the attain-

ment of man’s last end. Such are: the purpose and limits
of temporal authority

;
the relations between the individual

and society, the so-called “totalitarian state,” whatever be

the principle it is based on; the “complete laicization of

the State” and of public life
;
the complete laicization of the

schools
;
war, its morality, liceity or non-liceity when waged

as it is today, and whether a conscientious person may give
or withhold his cooperation in it; the moral relationships

which bind and rule the various nations.

17. Common sense, and truth as well, are contradicted by
whoever asserts that these and like problems are outside
the field of morals, and hence are, or at least can be, beyond
the influence of that authority established by God to see
to a just order and to direct the consciences and actions of
men along the path to their true and final destiny. This
she is certainly to do not only “in secret,” within the walls

13



of the Church and sacristy, but also in the open, crying

“from the rooftops” (to use the Lord’s words. Matt. 10, 27)

,

in the front line, in the midst of the struggle that rages

between truth and error, virtue and vice, between the

“world” and the kingdom of God, between the prince of

this world and Christ its Saviour.

18. We must add a few remarks on ecclesiastical discipline.
Clergy and the laity must realize that the Church is fitted

and authorized, as also are the Bishops for the faithful

entrusted to them, in accordance with Canon Law, to pro-

mote ecclesiastical discipline and see to its observance, i.e.,

to establish an external norm of action and conduct for

matters which concern public order and which do not have

their immediate origin in natural or divine law. Clerics

and laity may not exempt themselves from this discipline

;

rather all should be concerned to obey it, so that by the

loyal observance of the Church’s discipline the action of the

shepherd be easier and more efficacious, and the union be-

tween him and his flock stronger; that within the flock

harmony and coooperation reign, and each be an example

and support to his fellow.

19. Yet, those points We have just mentioned in connec-
tion with the jurisdiction of Bishops, who are shepherds of
the souls committed to their care in all those matters which

have to do with religion, moral law and ecclesiastical discip-

line, are subjected to criticism, often not above a whisper,

and do not recieve the firm assent they deserved. Hence,

some proud, modern spirits provoke serious and danger-

ous confusion, traces of which are more or less clear in

various regions. The awareness, daily more strongly in-

sisted on, of having reached maturity produces in them an

agitated and febrile spirit. Not a few moderns, men and
women, think that the leadership and vigilance of the

Church is not to be suffered by one who is grown up
;
they

not only say it, but they hold it as a firm conviction. They

are unwilling to be, like children, “under guardians and

stewards” (Gal. 4, 2). They wish to be treated as adults

who are in full possession of their rights, and can decide
for themselves what they must, or must not, do in any

given situation. Let the Church—^they do not hesitate to
say—propose her doctrine, pass her laws as norms of our
actions. Still, when there is question of practical applica-
tion to each individual’s life, the Church must not inter-

fere
;
she should let each one of the faithful follow his own

14



conscience and judgment. They declare this is all the more

necessary because the Church and her ministers are un-

aware of certain sets of circumstances either personal or

extrinsic to individuals; in them each person has been

placed, and must take his own counsel and decide what he
must do. Such people, moreover, are unwilling in their

final personal decisions to have any intermediary or inter-

cessor placed between themselves and God, no matter what

his rank or title. Two years ago, in Our allocutions of
March 23 and April 18, 1952, We spoke about these repre-
hensible theories and We examined their arguments {Dis-
corsi e Radio-messagi vol. 14, 1952, pp. 19 sq., pp. 69 sq.).

Concerning the importance given to the attainment of a

person’s majority this assertion is correct: it is just and

right that adults should not be ruled as children. The

Apostle speaking of himself says, “When I was a child, I
spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child.

Now that I have become a man, I have put away the things
of a child (I Cor. 13. 11)”. That is not a true art of educa-

tion which follows any other principle or procedure, nor is

he a true shepherd of souls who pursues any other purpose
than to elevate the faithful entrusted to his care “to perfect

manhood, to the mature measure of the fulness of Christ.”
(Eph. 4. 13). But to be an adult and to have put off the
things of childhood is one thing, and quite another to be
an adult and not to be subject to the guidance and govern-
ment of legitimate authority. For government is not a
kind of nursery for children, but the effective direction of

adults toward the end proposed to the state.

20. But since We are speaking to you, venerable brothers,
and not to the faithful; when these ideas begin to appear
and to take root in your flocks, remind the faithful: (1)
That God placed shepherds of souls in the Church not to
put a burden on the flock, but to help and protect it; (2)
that the true liberty of the faithful is safeguarded by the
guidance and vigilance of pastors

;
that they are protected

from the slavery of vice and error, they are strengthened
against the temptations which come from bad example and
from the customs of evil men among whom they must live

;

(3) that therefore they act contrary to the prudence and
charity which they owe themselves, if they spurn this pro-
tection of God and His most certain help. If among clergy
and priests you find some infected with this false zeal and
attitude, set before them the grave warnings which Our

15



Predecessor, Benedict XV, uttered: “There is one thing
which should not be passed over in silence: We want to
warn all priests, who are Our dearly beloved sons, how
absolutely necessary it is, not only for their own salvation,
but for the fruitfulness of their sacred ministry, that each

be most devoted and obedient to his own Bishop. As We
deplored in passing, not all dispensers of the sacred mys-

teries are free from that proud and arrogant spirit which

is characteristic of our times; and it frequently happens

that shepherds of the Church are grieved and opposed,

where they might rightly expect comfort and help (En-

cyclical Letter, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum Principis, Nov.
1, 1914; AAS, Vol. 6, 1914, p. 579)”.

21. Thus far We have spoken of pastoral care, about the
persons for whose benefit it is exercised; it is not right

to end Our discourse without turning Our attention to the

pastors themselves. To Us and to you shepherds the holy

words of the Eternal Shepherd are pertinent: “I am the
good shepherd. I came that they may have life, and have it
more abundantly” (John, 10, 11, 10). To Peter the Lord

said, “If you love me, feed my lambs, feed my sheep (John
21. 15, 17)”: To these good shepherds He contrasts the
hireling, who seeks himself and his own interests and is
not ready to give his life for his flock (cf. John 10. 12-13).

He contrasts them with the Scribes and Pharisees who,
greedy for power and domination, and seeking their own
glory, were seated on the chair of Moses, amassing heavy

and oppressive burdens and imposing them on the shoul-

ders of men (cf. Matt. 23. 1, 4) . Of His own yoke the Lord
said, “Take my yoke upon you! For my yoke is easy and
my burden light (Matt. 11. 29-30)”.

22. Frequent and mutual communication among Bishops is
very helpful for the fruitful and effective exercise of the

pastoral office. Thus one perfects the other in assaying the

lessons of past experience; government is made more uni-

form, the wonder of the faithful is avoided, for often they

do not understand why in one diocese a certain policy is
followed, while in another, which is perhaps adjacent, a

different or even a quite contrary policy is followed. To

realize these purposes general assemblies, which are now
held almost everywhere, are very helpful, and also the more

solemnly convened Provincial and Plenary Councils, for

which the Code of Canon Law provides, and which are
governed by definite laws.

16



23. In addition to this union and intercourse between

brothers in the episcopacy there should be added close

union and frequent communication with this Apostolic See.

The custom of consulting the Holy See not only in doc-

trinal matters, but also in affairs of government and dis-

cipline, has flourished from the earliest days of Chris-

tianity. Many proofs and examples are to be found in
ancient historical records. When asked for their decision,
the Roman Pontiffs did not answer as private theologians,
but in virtue of their authority and conscious of the power

which they received from Christ to rule over the whole

flock and each of its parts. The same is deduced from the

instances in which the Roman Pontiffs, unasked, settled
disputes that had arisen or commanded that “doubts” be

brought to them to be resolved. This union, therefore, and

harmonious communication with the Holy See arises not

from a kind of desire to centralize and unify everything,

but by divine right and by reason of an essential element

of the constitution of the Church of Christ. The result of

this is not detrimental but advantageous to the Bishops to

whom is entrusted the governing of individual flocks. For
from communication with the Apostolic See they gain

light and assurance “in doubts,” advice and strength in

difficulties, assistance in labors, comfort and solace in dis-

tress. On the other hand, from the “reports” of the Bishops
to the Apostolic See, the latter attains a wider knowledge

of the state of the whole flock, learns more quickly and more
accurately what dangers are threatening and what reme-
dies can be applied to cure the evils.

24. Venerable brothers, on the day before He suffered,
Christ prayed to the Father for the Apostles and at the
same time for all their successors in the Apostolic Office:
“Holy Father, keep in thy name those whom thou hast
given me, that they may be one, even as we are. As thou
has sent me into the world, so I also have sent them into
the world . . . may the love with which thou has loved me
be in them, and I in them” (John 17. 11, 18, 26).

25. And so We, also a presbyter, the Vicar on earth of
the Eternal Shepherd, have spoken to you, our fellow-
presbyters (I Peter 5, 1) and shepherds of your flocks,
close to the tombs of the Prince of the Apostles and Saint
Pius X, Supreme Pontiff

;
and at the end of Our discourse.

We turn Our thoughts again to the Mass “Si diligis,” with
which We began, in the preface of which we pray: “that

17



Thou, Eternal Shepherd, may not abandon Thy flock, but
through Thy Blessed Apostles may keep a continual watch
over it. That it may be governed by those same rulers
whom Thou didst set over it as shepherds in Thy Place”;
and in the second Postcommunion prayer we add: “In-
crease, we beseech Thee, 0 Lord, in Thy Church the spirit
of grace which Thou has given it, in order that through the

intercession of Blessed Pius, Supreme Pontiff, neither the

flock may be wanting in obedience to the Shepherd nor the
Shepherd in care of the flock.”

26. May God grant this prayer to all of you according to
the measure of His divine liberality!

18







It