"Tribus Circiter" by Pope Pius X (translated into English)

ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS X ON THE MARIAVITES OR MYSTIC PRIESTS OF POLAND TO OUR VENERABLE BRETHREN,THE ARCHBISHOPS OF WARSAW, AND BISHOPS OF PLOTSK AND LUBLIN AMONG THE POLES

Venerable Brethren, Health and the Apostolic Benediction.

                About three years ago this Apostolic See was duly informed that some priests, especially among the junior clergy of your dioceses, had founded, without permission from their lawful Superiors, a kind of pseudo-monastic society, known as the Mariavites or Mystic Priests, the members of which, little by little, turned aside from the right road and from the obedience they owe the Bishops "whom the Holy Ghost has placed to rule the Church of God," and became vain in their thoughts.

2. To a certain woman, whom they proclaimed to be most holy, marvelously endowed with heavenly gifts, divinely enlightened about many things, and providentially given for the salvation of a world about to perish, they did not hesitate to entrust themselves without reserve, and to obey her every wish.

3. Relying on an alleged mandate from God, they set themselves to promote without discrimination and of their own initiative among the people frequent exercises of piety (highly commendable when rightly carried out,) especially the adoration of the Most Holy Sacrament and the practice of frequent communion; but at the same time they made the gravest charges against all priests and bishops who ventured to express any doubt about the sanctity and divine election of the woman, or showed any hostility to the society of the Mariavites. Such a pass did matters reach that there was reason to fear that many of the faithful in their delusion were about to abandon their lawful pastors.

4. Hence, on the advice of Our Venerable Brethren the Cardinals of the General Inquisition, We had a decree issued, as you are aware, under date of September 4, 1904, suppressing the above-named society of priests, and commanding them to break off absolutely all relations with the woman. But the priests in question, notwithstanding that they signed a document expressing their subjection to the authority of their bishops and that perhaps they did, as they say they did, partly break off their relations with the woman, still failed to abandon their undertaking and to renounce sincerely the condemned association. Not only did they condemn your exhortations and inhibitions, not only did many of them sign as audacious declaration in which they rejected communion with their bishops, not only in more places than one did they incite the deluded people to drive away their lawful pastors, but, like the enemies of the Church, asserted that she has fallen from truth and justice, and hence has been abandoned by the Holy Spirit, and that to themselves alone, the Mariavite priests, was it divinely given to instruct the faithful in true piety.

5. Nor is this all. A few weeks ago two of these priests came to Rome: Romanus Prochniewsky and Joannes Kowalski, the latter of whom is recognized, in virtue of some kind of delegation from the woman referred to, as their Superior by all the members of the Society. Both of them, in a petition alleged by them to have been written by the express order of Our Lord Jesus Christ, ask the Supreme Pastor of the Church, or the Congregation of the Holy Office in his name, to issue a document conceived in these terms: "That Maria Francesca (the woman mentioned above) has been made most holy by God, that she is the mother of mercy for all men called and elected to salvation by God in these days; and that all Mariavite priests are commanded by God to promote throughout the world devotion to the Most Holy Sacrament and to the Blessed Virgin Mary of Perpetual Succor, free from all restriction of ecclesiastical or human law or custom, and from all ecclesiastical and human power whatsoever..."

6. From these words We were disposed to believe that the priests in question were blinded not so much by conscious pride as by ignorance and delusion, like those false prophets of whom Ezechiel writes: "They see vain things and they foretell lies, saying: The Lord saith: whereas the Lord hath not sent them: and they have persisted to confirm what they have said. Have you not seen a vain vision and spoken a lying divination: and you say: The Lord saith: whereas I have not spoken" (Ezechiel xiii. 6, 7). We therefore received them with piety, exhorted them to put away the deceits of vain revelation, to subject themselves and their works to the salutary authority of their Superiors, and to hasten the return of the faithful of Christ to the safe path of obedience and reverence towards their pastors; and finally to leave to the vigilance of the Holy See and the other competent authorities the task of confirming such pious customs as might seem best adapted for the fuller increase of Christian life in many parishes in your dioceses, and at the same time to admonish any priests who were found guilty of speaking abusively or contemptuously of devout practices and exercises approved by the Church. And We were consoled to see the two priests, moved by Our fatherly kindness, throw themselves at Our feet and express their firm resolution to carry out Our wishes with the devotedness of sons. They then caused to be transmitted to Us a written statement which increased Our hope that these deluded sons would sincerely abandon past illusions and return to the right road:

7. "We (these are their words), always ready to fulfill the will of God, which has now been made so clear to us by His Vicar, do most sincerely and joyfully revoke our letter, which we sent on February 1 of the present year to the Archbishop of Warsaw, and in which we declared that we separated from him. Moreover, we do most sincerely and with the greatest joy profess that we wish to be always united with our Bishops, and especially with the Archbishop of Warsaw, as far as your Holiness will order this of us. Furthermore, as we are now acting in the name of all the Mariavites, we do make this profession of our entire obedience and subjection in the name not only of all the Mariavites, but of all the Adorers of the Most Holy Sacrament. We make this profession in a special way in the name of the Mariavites of Plotsk who, for the same cause as the Mariavites of Warsaw, handed their Bishop a declaration of separation from him. Wherefore, all of us without exception prostrate at the feet of your Holiness, professing again and again our love and obedience to the Holy See, and in a most special way to your Holiness, most humbly ask pardon for any pain we may have caused your fatherly heart. Finally, we declare that we will at once set to work with all our energy to restore peace between the people and their Bishops immediately. Nay, we can affirm that this peace will be really restored very soon."

8. It was, therefore, very pleasant for Us to be able to believe that these sons of Ours, thus pardoned, would at once on their return to Poland give effect to their promises, and on this account We hastened to advise you, Venerable Brethren, to receive them and their companions, now that they professed entire obedience to your authority, with equal mercy and to restore them legally, if their acts corresponded with their promises, to their faculties for exercising their priestly functions.

                But the event has deceived Our hopes; for We have learnt by recent documents that they have again opened their minds to lying revelations, and that since their return to Poland, they not only have not yet shown you, Venerable Brethren, the respect and obedience they promised, but that they have written to their companions a letter quite opposed to truth and genuine obedience.

9. But their profession of fidelity to the Vicar of Christ is vain in those who, in fact, do not cease to violate the authority of their Bishops. For "by far the most august part of the Church consists of the Bishops, (as Our Predecessor Leo XIII of holy memory wrote in his letter of December 17, 1888, to the Archbishop), inasmuch as this part by divine right teaches and rules men; hence, whoever resists them or pertinaciously refuses obedience to them puts himself apart from the Church... On the other hand, to pass judgment upon or to rebuke the acts of Bishops does not at all belong to private individuals - that comes within the province only of those higher than they in authority and especially of the Sovereign Pontiff, for to him Christ entrusted the charge of feeding not only His lambs, but His sheep throughout the world. At most, it is allowed in matters of grave complaint to refer the whole case to the Roman Pontiff, and this with prudence and moderation as zeal for the common good requires, not clamorously or abusively, for in this way dissensions and hostilities are bred, or certainly increased."

10. Idle and deceitful too is the exhortation of the priest Johannes Kowalski to his companions in error on behalf of peace, while he persists in his foolish talk and incitements to rebellion against legitimate pastors and in brazen violation of episcopal commands.

11. Wherefore, that the faithful of Christ and all the so-called Mariavite priests who are in good faith may no longer be led astray by the delusions of the woman above-mentioned and of the priest Johannes Kowalski, We again confirm the decree whereby the society of Mariavites, unlawfully and invalidly founded, is entirely suppressed, and We declare it suppressed and condemned, and We proclaim that the prohibition is still in force which forbids all priests, with the exception of the one whom the Bishop of Plotsk shall in his prudence depute to be her confessor, to have anything whatever to do on any pretext with the woman.

12. You, Venerable Brethren, We earnestly exhort to embrace with paternal charity erring priests immediately they sincerely repent, and not to refuse to call them again, under your direction, to their priestly duties, when they have been duly proved worthy. But should they, which may God forbid, reject your exhortations and persevere in their contumacy, it will be Our care to see that they are severely dealt with. Study to lead back to the right path the faithful of Christ who are now laboring under a delusion that may be pardoned; and foster in your dioceses those practices of piety, recently or long since approved in numerous documents issued by the Apostolic See, and do this with all the more alacrity now when by the blessing of God priests among you are enabled to exercise their ministry and the faithful to emulate the example of piety of their fathers.

13. Meanwhile as a pledge of heavenly favors and in evidence of Our paternal good will we bestow most lovingly in the Lord the Apostolic Benediction on you, Venerable Brethren, and on all the clergy and people entrusted to your care and vigilance.

Given at Rome, at St. Peter's, the fifth day of April, MDCCCCVI, in the third year of Our Pontificate.

PIUS X

Oath Against Modernism by Pope St. Pius X (translated into English)

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.

“Quam Singulari” by Pope Pius X (translated into English)

Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Discipline of the Sacraments on First Communion

The pages of the Gospel show clearly how special was that love for children which Christ showed while He was on earth. It was His delight to be in their midst; He was wont to lay His hands on them; He embraced them; and He blessed them. At the same time He was not pleased when they would be driven away by the disciples, whom He rebuked gravely with these words: “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for of such is the kingdom of God.” It is clearly seen how highly He held their innocence and the open simplicity of their souls on that occasion when He called a little child to Him and said to the disciples: “Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like little children, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven….And whoever receives one such little child for my sake, receives me.”

                The Catholic Church, bearing this in mind, took care even from the beginning to bring the little ones to Christ through Eucharistic Communion, which was administered even to nursing infants. This, as was prescribed in almost all ancient Ritual books, was done at Baptism until the thirteenth century, and this custom prevailed in some places even later. It is still found in the Greek and Oriental Churches. But to remove the danger that infants might eject the Consecrated Host, the custom obtained from the beginning of administering the Eucharist to them under the species of wine only.

                Infants, however, not only at the time of Baptism, but also frequently thereafter were admitted to the sacred repast. In some churches it was the custom to give the Eucharist to the children immediately after the clergy; in others, the small fragments which remained after the Communion of the adults were given to the children.

                This practice later died out in the Latin Church, and children were not permitted to approach the Holy Table until they had come to the use of reason and had some knowledge of this august Sacrament. This new practice, already accepted by certain local councils, was solemnly confirmed by the Fourth Council of the Lateran, in 1215, which promulgated its celebrated Canon XXI, whereby sacramental Confession and Holy Communion were made obligatory on the faithful after they had attained the use of reason, in these words: “All the faithful of both sexes shall, after reaching the years of discretion, make private confession of all their sins to their own priest at least once a year, and shall, according to their capacity, perform the enjoined penance; they shall also devoutly receive the Sacrament of Holy Eucharist at least at Easter time unless on the advice of their own priest, for some reasonable cause, it be deemed well to abstain for a while.”

                The Council of Trent, in no way condemning the ancient practice of administering the Eucharist to children before they had attained the use of reason, confirmed the Decree of the Lateran Council and declared anathema those who held otherwise: “If anyone denies that each and all Christians of both sexes are bound, when they have attained the years of discretion, to receive Communion every year at least at Easter, in accordance with the precept of Holy Mother Church, let him be anathema.”

                In accord with this Decree of the Lateran Council, still in effect, the faithful are obliged, as soon as they arrive at the years of discretion, to receive the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Eucharist at least once a year.

                However, in the precise determination of “the age of reason or discretion” not a few errors and deplorable abuses have crept in during the course of time. There were some who maintained that one age of discretion must be assigned to reception of the Sacrament of Penance and another to the Holy Eucharist. They held that for Confession the age of discretion is reached when one can distinguish right from wrong, hence can commit sin; for Holy Eucharist, however, a greater age is required in which a full knowledge of matters of faith and a better preparation of the soul can be had. As a consequence, owing to various local customs and opinions, the age determined for the reception of First Communion was placed at ten years or twelve, and in places fourteen years or even more were required; and until that age children and youth were prohibited from Eucharistic Communion.

                This practice of preventing the faithful from receiving on the plea of safeguarding the august Sacrament has been the cause of many evils. It happened that children in their innocence were forced away from the embrace of Christ and deprived of the food of their interior life; and from this it also happened that in their youth, destitute of this strong help, surrounded by so many temptations, they lost their innocence and fell into vicious habits even before tasting of the Sacred Mysteries. And even if a thorough instruction and a careful Sacramental Confession should precede Holy Communion, which does not everywhere occur, still the loss of first innocence is always to be deplored and might have been avoided by reception of the Eucharist in more tender years.

                No less worthy of condemnation is that practice which prevails in many places prohibiting from Sacramental Confession children who have not yet made their First Holy Communion, or of not giving them absolution. Thus it happens that they, perhaps having fallen into serious sin, remain in that very dangerous state for a long time.

                But worse still is the practice in certain places which prohibits children who have not yet made their First Communion from being fortified by the Holy Viaticum, even when they are in imminent danger of death; and thus, when they die they are buried with the rites due to infants and are deprived of the prayers of the Church.

                Such is the injury caused by those who insist on extraordinary preparations for First Communion, beyond what is reasonable; and they doubtless do not realize that such precautions proceed from the errors of the Jansenists who contended that the Most Holy Eucharist is a reward rather than a remedy for human frailty. The Council of Trent, indeed, teaches otherwise when it calls the Eucharist, “An antidote whereby we may be freed from daily faults and be preserved from mortal sins.” This doctrine was not long ago strongly emphasized by a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council given on December 20, 1905. It declared that daily approach to Communion is open to all, old and young, and two conditions only are required: the state of grace and a right intention.

                Moreover, the fact that in ancient times the remaining particles of the Sacred Species were even given to nursing infants seems to indicate that no extraordinary preparation should now be demanded of children who are in the happy state of innocence and purity of soul, and who, amidst so many dangers and seductions of the present time have a special need of this heavenly food.

                The abuses which we are condemning are due to the fact that they who distinguished one age of discretion for Penance and another for the Eucharist did so in error. The Lateran Council required one and the same age for reception of either Sacrament when it imposed the one obligation of Confession and Communion.

                Therefore, the age of discretion for Confession is the time when one can distinguish between right and wrong, that is, when one arrives at a certain use of reason, and so similarly, for Holy Communion is required the age when one can distinguish between the Bread of the Holy Eucharist and ordinary bread-again the age at which a child attains the use of reason.

                The principal interpreters of the Lateran Council and contemporaries of that period had the same teaching concerning this Decree. The history of the Church reveals that a number of synods and episcopal decrees beginning with the twelfth century, shortly after the Lateran Council, admitted children of seven years of age to First Communion. There is moreover the word of St. Thomas Aquinas, who is an authority of the highest order, which reads: “When children begin to have some use of reason, so that they can conceive a devotion toward this Sacrament (the Eucharist), then this Sacrament can be given to them.”6 Ledesma thus explains these words: “I say, in accord with common opinion, that the Eucharist is to be given to all who have the use of reason, and just as soon as they attain the use of reason, even though at the time the child may have only a confused notion of what he is doing.” Vasquez comments on the same words of St. Thomas as follows: “When a child has once arrived at the use of reason he is immediately bound by the divine law from which not even the Church can dispense him.”

                The same is the teachings of St. Antoninus, who wrote: “But when a child is capable of doing wrong, that is of committing a mortal sin, then he is bound by the precept of Confession and consequently of Communion.” The Council of Trent also forces us to the same conclusion when it declares: “Children who have not attained the use of reason are not by any necessity bound to Sacramental Communion of the Eucharist.” It assigns as the only reason the fact that they cannot commit sin: “they cannot at that age lose the grace of the sons of God already acquired.”

                From this it is the mind of the Council that children are held to Communion by necessity and by precept when they are capable of losing grace by sin. The words of the Roman Synod, held under Benedict XIII, are in agreement with this in teaching that the obligation to receive the Eucharist begins, “after boys and girls attain the age of discretion, that is, at the age in which they can distinguish this Sacramental food, which is none other than the true Body of Jesus Christ, from common and ordinary bread; and that they know how to receive it with proper religious spirit.”

                The Roman Catechism adds this: “At what age children are to receive the Holy Mysteries no one can better judge than their father and the priest who is their confessor. For it is their duty to ascertain by questioning the children whether they have any understanding of this admirable Sacrament and if they have any desire for it.”

                From all this it is clear that the age of discretion for receiving Holy Communion is that at which the child knows the difference between the Eucharistic Bread and ordinary, material bread, and can therefore approach the altar with proper devotion. Perfect knowledge of the things of faith, therefore, is not required, for an elementary knowledge suffices-some knowledge (aliqua cognitio); similarly full use of reason is not required, for a certain beginning of the use of reason, that is, some use of reason (aliqualis usus rationis) suffices.

                To postpone Communion, therefore, until later and to insist on a more mature age for its reception must be absolutely discouraged, and indeed such practice was condemned more than once by the Holy See. Thus Pope Pius IX, of happy memory, in a Letter of Cardinal Antonelli to the Bishops of France, March 12, 1866, severely condemned the growing custom existing in some dioceses of postponing the First Communion of children until more mature years, and at the same time sharply disapproved of the age limit which had been assigned. Again, the Sacred Congregation of the Council, on March 15, 1851, corrected a prescription of the Provincial Council of Rouen, which prohibited children under twelve years of age from receiving First Communion. Similarly, this Sacred Congregation of the Discipline of the Sacraments, on March 25, 1910, in a question proposed to it from Strasburg whether children of twelve or fourteen years could be admitted to Holy Communion, answered: “Boys and girls are to be admitted to the Holy Table when they arrive at the years of discretion or the use of reason.”

                After careful deliberation on all these points, this Sacred Congregation of the Discipline of the Sacraments, in a general meeting held on July 15, 1910, in order to remove the above-mentioned abuses and to bring about that children even from their tender years may be united to Jesus Christ, may live His life, and obtain protection from all danger of corruption, has deemed it needful to prescribe the following rules which are to be observed everywhere for the First Communion of children.

                1. The age of discretion, both for Confession and for Holy Communion, is the time when a child begins to reason, that is about the seventh year, more or less. From that time on begins the obligation of fulfilling the precept of both Confession and Communion.

                2. A full and perfect knowledge of Christian doctrine is not necessary either for First Confession or for First Communion. Afterwards, however, the child will be obliged to learn gradually the entire Catechism according to his ability.

                3. The knowledge of religion which is required in a child in order to be properly prepared to receive First Communion is such that he will understand according to his capacity those Mysteries of faith which are necessary as a means of salvation (necessitate medii) and that he can distinguish between the Bread of the Eucharist and ordinary, material bread, and thus he may receive Holy Communion with a devotion becoming his years.

                4. The obligation of the precept of Confession and Communion which binds the child particularly affects those who have him in charge, namely, parents, confessor, teachers and the pastor. It belongs to the father, or the person taking his place, and to the confessor, according to the Roman Catechism, to admit a child to his First Communion.

                5. The pastor should announce and hold a General Communion of the children once a year or more often, and he should on these occasions admit not only the First Communicants but also others who have already approached the Holy Table with the above-mentioned consent of their parents or confessor. Some days of instruction and preparation should be previously given to both classes of children.

                6. Those who have charge of the children should zealously see to it that after their First Communion these children frequently approach the Holy Table, even daily if possible, as Jesus Christ and Mother Church desire, and let this be done with a devotion becoming their age. They must also bear in mind that very grave duty which obliged them to have the children attend the public Catechism classes; if this is not done, then they must supply religious instruction in some other way.

                7. The custom of not admitting children to Confession or of not giving them absolution when they have already attained the use of reason must be entirely abandoned. The Ordinary shall see to it that this condition ceases absolutely, and he may, if necessary, use legal measures accordingly.

                8. The practice of not administering the Viaticum and Extreme Unction to children who have attained the use of reason, and of burying them with the rite used for infants is a most intolerable abuse. The Ordinary should take very severe measures against those who do not give up the practice.

His Holiness, Pope Pius X, in an audience granted on the seventh day of this month, approved all the above decisions of this Sacred Congregation, and ordered this Decree to be published and promulgated.

                He furthermore commanded that all the Ordinaries make this Decree known not only to the pastors and the clergy, but also to the people, and he wishes that it be read in the vernacular every year at the Easter time. The Ordinaries shall give an account of the observance of this Decree together with other diocesan matters every five years.

“Tra le Sollicitude” by Pope Pius X (translated into Portuguese by unknown writer)

MOTU PROPRIO

“TRA LE SOLLICITUDE”

DO SUMO PONTÍFICE PIO X

SOBRE A MÚSICA SACRA

INTRODUÇÃO - Entre os cuidados do ofício pastoral, não somente desta Suprema Cátedra, que por imperscrutável disposição da Providência, ainda que indigno, ocupamos, mas também de todas as Igrejas particulares, é, sem dúvida, um dos principais o de manter e promover o decoro da Casa de Deus, onde se celebram os augustos mistérios da religião e o povo cristão se reúne, para receber a graça dos Sacramentos, assistir ao Santo Sacrifício do altar, adorar o augustíssimo Sacramento do Corpo do Senhor e unir-se à oração comum da Igreja na celebração pública e solene dos ofícios litúrgicos.

                Nada, pois, deve suceder no templo que perturbe ou, sequer, diminua a piedade e a devoção das fiéis, nada que dê justificado motivo de desgosto ou de escândalo, nada, sobretudo, que diretamente ofenda o decoro e a santidade das sacras funções e seja por isso indigno da Casa de Oração e da majestade de Deus.

                Não nos ocupamos de cada um dos abusos que nesta matéria podem ocorrer. A nossa atenção dirige-se hoje para um dos mais comuns, dos mais difíceis de desarraigar e que às vezes se deve deplorar em lugares onde tudo o mais é digno de máximo encômio para beleza e suntuosidade do templo, esplendor e perfeita ordem das cerimônias, freqüência do clero, gravidade e piedade dos ministros do altar. Tal é o abuso em matéria de canto e Música Sacra. E de fato, quer pela natureza desta arte de si flutuante e variável, quer pela sucessiva alteração do gosto e dos hábitos no correr dos tempos, quer pelo funesto influxo que sobre a arte sacra exerce a arte profana e teatral, quer pelo prazer que a música diretamente produz e que nem sempre é fácil conter nos justos limites, quer, finalmente, pelos muitos preconceitos, que em tal assunto facilmente se insinuam e depois tenazmente se mantêm, ainda entre pessoas autorizadas e piedosas, há uma tendência contínua para desviar da reta norma, estabelecida em vista do fim para que a arte se admitiu ao serviço do culto, e expressa nos cânones eclesiásticos, nas ordenações dos Concílios gerais e provinciais, nas prescrições várias vezes emanadas das Sagradas Congregações Romanas e dos Sumos Pontífices Nossos Predecessores.

                Com verdadeira satisfação da alma nos apraz recordar o muito bem que nesta parte se tem feito nos últimos decênios, também nesta nossa augusta cidade de Roma e em muitas Igrejas da Nossa pátria, mas em modo muito particular em algumas nações, onde homens egrégios e zelosos do culto de Deus, com aprovação desta Santa Sé e dos Bispos, se uniram em florescentes sociedades e reconduziram ao seu lugar de honra a Música Sacra em quase todas as suas Igrejas e Capelas. Este progresso está todavia ainda muito longe de ser comum a todos; e se consultarmos a nossa experiência pessoal e tivermos em conta as reiteradas queixas, que de todas as partes Nos chegaram neste pouco tempo decorrido, desde que aprouve ao Senhor elevar a Nossa humilde Pessoa à suprema culminância do Pontificado Romano, sem protrairmos por mais tempo, cremos que é nosso primeiro dever levantar a voz para reprovação e condenação de tudo que nas funções do culto e nos ofícios eclesiásticos se reconhece desconforme com a reta norma indicada.

                Sendo de fato nosso vivíssimo desejo que o espírito cristão refloresça em tudo e se mantenha em todos os fiéis, é necessário prover antes de mais nada à santidade e dignidade do templo, onde os fiéis se reúnem precisamente para haurirem esse espírito da sua primária e indispensável fonte: a participação ativa nos sacrossantos mistérios e na oração pública e solene da Igreja. E debalde se espera que para isso desça sobre nós copiosa a bênção do Céu, quando o nosso obséquio ao Altíssimo, em vez de ascender em odor de suavidade, vai pelo contrário repor nas mãos do Senhor os flagelos, com que uma vez o Divino Redentor expulsou do templo os indignos profanadores. Portanto, para que ninguém doravante possa alegar a desculpa de não conhecer claramente o seu dever, e para que desapareça qualquer equívoco na interpretação de certas determinações anteriores, julgamos oportuno indicar com brevidade os princípios que regem a Música Sacra nas funções do culto e recolher num quadro geral as principais prescrições da Igreja contra os abusos mais comuns em tal matéria.

                E por isso, de própria iniciativa e ciência certa, publicamos a Nossa presente instrução; será ela como que um código jurídico de Música Sacra; e, em virtude da plenitude de Nossa Autoridade Apostólica, queremos que se lhe dê força de lei, impondo a todos, por este Nosso quirógrafo, a sua mais escrupulosa observância.

I. Princípios gerais

1. A música sacra, como parte integrante da Liturgia solene, participa do seu fim geral, que é a glória de Deus e a santificação dos fiéis. A música concorre para aumentar o decoro e esplendor das sagradas cerimônias; e, assim como o seu ofício principal é revestir de adequadas melodias o texto litúrgico proposto à consideração dos fiéis, assim o seu fim próprio é acrescentar mais eficácia ao mesmo texto, a fim de que por tal meio se excitem mais facilmente os fiéis à piedade e se preparem melhor para receber os frutos da graça, próprios da celebração dos sagrados mistérios.

2. Por isso a música sacra deve possuir, em grau eminente, as qualidades próprias da liturgia, e nomeadamente a santidade e a delicadeza das formas, donde resulta espontaneamente outra característica, a universalidade.

                Deve ser santa, e por isso excluir todo o profano não só em si mesma, mas também no modo como é desempenhada pelos executantes.

                Deve ser arte verdadeira, não sendo possível que, doutra forma, exerça no ânimo dos ouvintes aquela eficácia que a Igreja se propõe obter ao admitir na sua liturgia a arte dos sons. Mas seja, ao mesmo tempo, universal no sentido de que, embora seja permitido a cada nação admitir nas composições religiosas aquelas formas particulares, que em certo modo constituem o caráter específico da sua música própria, estas devem ser de tal maneira subordinadas aos caracteres gerais da música sacra que ninguém doutra nação, ao ouvi-las, sinta uma impressão desagradável.

II. Gêneros de Música Sacra

3. Estas qualidades se encontram em grau sumo no canto gregoriano, que é por conseqüência o canto próprio da Igreja Romana, o único que ela herdou dos antigos Padres, que conservou cuidadosamente no decurso dos séculos em seus códigos litúrgicos e que, como seu, propõe diretamente aos fiéis, o qual estudos recentíssimos restituíram à sua integridade e pureza.

                Por tais motivos, o canto gregoriano foi sempre considerado como o modelo supremo da música sacra, podendo com razão estabelecer-se a seguinte lei geral: uma composição religiosa será tanto mais sacra e litúrgica quanto mais se aproxima no andamento, inspiração e sabor da melodia gregoriana, e será tanto menos digna do templo quanto mais se afastar daquele modelo supremo.

                O canto gregoriano deverá, pois, restabelecer-se amplamente nas funções do culto, sendo certo que uma função eclesiástica nada perde da sua solenidade, mesmo quando não é acompanhada senão da música gregoriana.

                Procure-se nomeadamente restabelecer o canto gregoriano no uso do povo, para que os fiéis tomem de novo parte mais ativa nos ofícios litúrgicos, como se fazia antigamente.

4. As sobreditas qualidades verificam-se também na polifonia clássica, especialmente na da Escola Romana, que no século XVI atingiu a sua maior perfeição com as obras de Pedro Luís de Palestrina, e que continuou depois a produzir composições de excelente qualidade musical e litúrgica. A polifonia clássica, aproximando-se do modelo de toda a música sacra, que é o canto gregoriano, mereceu por esse motivo ser admitida, juntamente com o canto gregoriano, nas funções mais solenes da Igreja, quais são as da Capela Pontifícia. Por isso também essa deverá restabelecer-se nas funções eclesiásticas, principalmente nas mais insignes basílicas, nas igrejas catedrais, nas dos Seminários e outros institutos eclesiásticos, onde não costumam faltar os meios necessários.

5. A Igreja tem reconhecido e favorecido sempre o progresso das artes, admitindo ao serviço do culto o que o gênio encontrou de bom e belo através dos séculos, salvas sempre as leis litúrgicas. Por isso é que a música mais moderna é também admitida na Igreja, visto que apresenta composições de tal qualidade, seriedade e gravidade que não são de forma alguma indigna das funções litúrgicas.

                Todavia, como a música moderna foi inventada principalmente para uso profano, deverá vigiar-se com maior cuidado por que as composições musicais de estilo moderno, que se admitem na Igreja, não tenham coisa alguma de profana, não tenham reminiscências de motivos teatrais, e não sejam compostas, mesmo nas suas formas externas, sobre o andamento das composições profanas.

6. Entre os vários gêneros de música moderna, o que parece menos próprio para acompanhar as funções do culto é o que tem ressaibos de estilo teatral, que durante o século XVI esteve tanto em voga, sobretudo na Itália. Este, por sua natureza, apresenta a máxima oposição ao canto gregoriano e à clássica polifonia, por isso mesmo às leis mais importantes de toda a boa música sacra. Além disso, a íntima estrutura, o ritmo e o chamado convencionalismo de tal estilo não se adaptam bem às exigências da verdadeira música litúrgica.

III. Texto Litúrgico

7. A língua própria da Igreja Romana é a latina. Por isso é proibido cantar em língua vulgar, nas funções litúrgicas solenes, seja o que for, e muito particularmente, tratando-se das partes variáveis ou comuns da Missa e do Ofício.

8. Estando determinados, para cada função litúrgica, os textos que hão de musicar-se e a ordem por que se devem cantar, não é lícito alterar esta ordem, nem substituir os textos prescritos por outros, nem omiti-los na íntegra ou em parte, a não ser que as Rubricas litúrgicas permitam suprir, com órgão, alguns versículos do texto, que são simplesmente recitados no coro. É permitido somente, segundo o costume romano, cantar um motete em honra do S. Sacramento depois do Benedictus da Missa solene. Permite-se outrossim que, depois de cantado o ofertório prescrito, se possa executar, no tempo que resta, um breve motete sobre palavras aprovadas pela Igreja.

9. O texto litúrgico tem de ser cantado como se encontra nos livros aprovados, sem posposição ou alteração das palavras, sem repetições indevidas, sem deslocar as silabas, sempre de modo inteligível.

IV. Forma externa das composições sacras

10. As várias artes da Missa e Ofício devem conservar, até musicalmente, a forma que a tradição eclesiástica lhes deu, e que se encontra admiravelmente expressada no canto gregoriano. É, pois, diverso o modo de compor um Intróito, um Gradual, uma Antífona, um Salmo, um Hino, um Glória in excelsis, etc.

11. Observem-se, em particular, as normas seguintes:

    a) O Kyrie, o Glória, o Credo, etc., da Missa, devem conservar a unidade de composição própria do texto. Por conseguinte, não é lícito compô-las como peças separadas, de modo que, cada uma destas forme uma composição musical tão completa que possa separar-se das restantes e ser substituída por outra.

    b) No ofício de Vésperas deve seguir-se, ordinariamente, a norma do Caeremoniale Episcoporum que prescreve o canto gregoriano para a salmodia, e permite a música figurada nos versículos do Gloria Patri e no hino.

Contudo, é permitido, nas maiores solenidades, alternar o canto gregoriano do coro com os chamados "falsibordoni" ou com versos de modo semelhante convenientemente compostos. Poderá também conceder-se, uma vez por outra, que cada um dos salmos seja totalmente musicado, contanto que, em tais composições, se conserve a forma própria da salmodia, isto é, que os cantores pareçam salmodiar entre si, já com motivos musicais novos, já com motivos tirados do canto gregoriano, ou imitados deste.

                Ficam proibidos, nas cerimônias litúrgicas, os salmos de concerto.

    c) Conserve-se, nas músicas da Igreja, a forma tradicional do hino. Não é permitido compor, por exemplo, o Tantum ergo de modo que a primeira estrofe apresente a forma de romanza, cavatina ou adágio e o Genitori a de allegro.

    d) As antífonas de Vésperas têm de ser cantadas, ordinariamente, com a melodia gregoriana que lhes é própria. Porém, se em algum caso particular se cantarem em música, não deverão nunca ter a forma de melodia de concerto, nem a amplitude dum motete ou de cantata.

V. Os cantores

12. Excetuadas as melodias próprias do celebrante e dos ministros, que sempre devem ser em gregoriano, sem acompanhamento de órgão, todo o restante canto litúrgico faz parte do coro dos levitas. Por isso, os cantores, ainda que leigos, realizam, propriamente, as funções de coro eclesiástico, devendo as músicas, ao menos na sua maior parte, conservar o caráter de música de coro.

                Não se entende com isto excluir, de todo, os solos; mas estes não devem nunca predominar de tal maneira que a maior parte do texto litúrgico seja assim executada; deve antes ter o caráter de uma simples frase melódica e estar intimamente ligada ao resto da composição coral.

13. Os cantores têm na Igreja um verdadeiro ofício litúrgico e, por isso, as mulheres sendo incapazes de tal ofício, não podem ser admitidas a fazer parte do coro ou da capela musical. Querendo-se, pois, ter vozes agudas de sopranos e contraltos, empreguem-se os meninos, segundo o uso antiquíssimo da Igreja.

14. Finalmente, não se admitam a fazer parte da capela musical senão homens de conhecida piedade e probidade de vida, os quais, com a sua devota e modesta atitude, durante as funções litúrgicas, se mostrem dignos do santo ofício que exercem. Será, além disso, conveniente que os cantores, enquanto cantam na igreja, vistam hábito eclesiástico e sobrepeliz e que, se o coro estiver muito exposto à vista do público, seja resguardado por grades.

VI. Órgão e Instrumentos

15. Posto que a música própria da Igreja é a música meramente vocal, contudo também se permite a música com acompanhamento de órgão. Nalgum caso particular, com as convenientes cautelas, poderão admitir-se outros instrumentos nunca sem o consentimento especial do Ordinário, conforme as prescrições do Caeremoniale Episcoporum.

16. Como o canto tem de ouvir-se sempre, o órgão e os instrumentos devem simplesmente sustentá-lo, e nunca encobri-lo.

17. Não é permitido antepor ao canto extensos prelúdios, ou interrompê-lo com peças de interlúdios.

18. O som do órgão, nos acompanhamentos do canto, nos prelúdios, interlúdios e outras passagens semelhantes, não só deve ser de harmonia com a própria natureza de tal instrumento, isto é, grave, mas deve ainda participar de todas as qualidades que tem a verdadeira música sacra, acima mencionadas.

19. É proibido, na Igreja, o uso do piano bem como o de instrumentos fragorosos, o tambor, o bombo, os pratos, as campainhas e semelhantes.

20. É rigorosamente proibido que as bandas musicais toquem nas igrejas, e só em algum caso particular, com o consentimento do Ordinário, será permitida uma escolha limitada, judiciosa e proporcionada ao ambiente de instrumentos de sopro, contanto que a composição seja em estilo grave, conveniente e semelhante em tudo às do órgão.

21. Nas procissões, fora da igreja, pode o Ordinário permitir a banda musical, uma vez que não se executem composições profanas. Seria para desejar que a banda se restringisse a acompanhar algum cântico espiritual, em latim ou vulgar, proposto pelos cantores ou pias congregações que tomam parte na procissão.

VII. Amplitude da Música Sacra

22. Não é licito, por motivo do canto, fazer esperar o sacerdote no altar mais tempo do que exige a cerimônia litúrgica. Segundo as prescrições eclesiásticas, o Sanctus deve ser cantado antes da elevação, devendo o celebrante esperar que o canto termine, para fazer a elevação. A música da Glória e do Credo, segundo a tradição gregoriana, deve ser relativamente breve.

23. É condenável, como abuso gravíssimo, que nas funções eclesiásticas a liturgia esteja dependente da música, quando é certo que a música é que é parte da liturgia e sua humilde serva.

VIII. Meios principais

24. Para o exato cumprimento de quanto fica estabelecido, os Bispos, se ainda não o fizeram, instituam, nas suas dioceses, uma comissão especial de pessoas verdadeiramente competentes na música sacra, à qual confiarão o cargo de vigiar as músicas que se vão executando em suas igrejas para que sejam conformes com estas determinações. Nem atender somente a que sejam boas as músicas, senão também a que correspondam ao valor dos cantores, para haver boa execução.

25. Nos Seminários e nos Institutos eclesiásticos, segundo as prescrições tridentinas, consagrem-se todos os alunos ao estudo do canto gregoriano e os superiores sejam liberais em animar e louvar os seus súditos. Igualmente, onde for possível, promova-se entre os clérigos a fundação de uma Schola Cantorum para a execução da sagrada polifonia e da boa música litúrgica.

26. Nas lições ordinárias de Liturgia, Moral e Direito Canônico, que se dão aos estudantes de teologia, não se deixe de tocar naqueles pontos que, de modo mais particular, dizem respeito aos princípios e leis da música sacra, e procure-se completar a doutrina com alguma instrução especial acerca da estética da arte sacra, para que os clérigos não saiam dos seminários ignorando estas noções, tão necessária à plena cultura eclesiástica.

27. Tenha-se o cuidado de restabelecer, ao menos nas igrejas principais, as antigas Scholae Cantorum, como se há feito já, com ótimo fruto, em muitos lugares. Não é difícil, ao clero zeloso, instituir tais Scholae, mesmo nas igrejas de menor importância, e até encontrará nelas um meio fácil para reunir em volta de si os meninos e os adultos, com proveito para eles e edificação do povo.

28. Procure-se sustentar e promover, do melhor modo, as escolas superiores de música sacra, onde já existem, e concorrer para as fundar, onde as não há. É sumamente importante que a mesma igreja atenda à instrução dos seus mestres de música, organistas e cantores, segundo os verdadeiros princípios da arte sacra.

IX Conclusão

29. Por último, recomenda-se aos mestres de capela, aos cantores, aos clérigos, aos superiores dos Seminários, Institutos eclesiásticos e comunidades religiosas, aos párocos e reitores de igrejas, aos cônegos das colegiadas e catedrais, e sobretudo aos Ordinários diocesanos, que favoreçam, com todo o zelo, estas reformas de há muito desejadas e por todos unanimemente pedidas, para que não caia em desprezo a autoridade da Igreja que repetidamente as propôs e agora de novo as inculca.

Dado em o Nosso Palácio do Vaticano, na festa da Virgem e Mártir Santa Cecília,

22 de novembro de 1903, primeiro ano do nosso pontificado.

PAPA PIO X