Given on the 1st of September, 1910.
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. And first of all, I profess that God, the
origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light
of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible
works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his
existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external
proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and
prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion
and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all
eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith
that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally
instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that
the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his
successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the
doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox
Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore,
I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and
change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held
previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the
divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully
guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human
conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue
to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess
that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of
the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will
trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth
received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the
authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has
been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.
Furthermore, with
due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations,
declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and
in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the
history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held
by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in
which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of
the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of
those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of
a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a
historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to
establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would
lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I
reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which,
departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms
of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and
with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme
norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor
lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside
any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or
about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and
that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by
scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same
liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary
historical documents.
Finally, I
declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold
that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say
that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would
remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the
ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own
labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun
by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying
breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is,
was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles.
The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what
seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the
absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may
never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.
I promise that I shall keep all these articles
faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way
deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I
promise, this I swear, so help me God.
