Syllabus of Errors. Catholicism is Totalitarian

[Hubriss]

I’ve recently been looking up information on separation of church and state, and I came across an interesting article that mentioned some “errors” that the Catholic Church had condemned, which included the separation of church and state and freedom of religion. I looked further and came across this document:

papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm

It is the Syllabus of Errors Condemned by Pope Pius IX during Vatican I. As I read through them I was surprised at some of the things I had found. Many of the ideas that the church condemned were ones that most reasonable people in the most civilized countries believed in. Most people, even Catholics, would find many of them objectionable. I had also found statements that are inconsistent with what I’ve heard were Catholic beliefs (or not Catholic beliefs). But I had come to understand that these were stated with papal infallibility. So being the provocative person that I am, I have decided to show them to you all, and my thoughts about what they say about the true Catholic faith.

Remember, these are beliefs that Pius IX condemned, so the opposite of them are the beliefs that are supposed to be considered Truth.
The first ones that jumped out at me were:
“5. Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason. – Ibid.”
“7. The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth.”

These are very fundamentalist ideas. The Catholic Church believes that all of scripture is divinely inspired, and 5 says that the revelation is perfect. This would mean that it is an error to not believe literally in Creationism, and believe that all the stories that are not obviously stories (Psalms, Jesus stories, Proverbs I think) are actually perfect and totally true. Laws such as stoning, murdering and raping enemies, the right to have slaves, etc, are not to be subject to the advancement of human reasoning and are to be followed even if we find them objectionable today. 7 states that all miracles and prophecies are completely true all in the NT and OT. They are not stories, they actually happened.

“24. The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect. – Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.”
“25. Besides the power inherent in the episcopate, other temporal power has been attributed to it by the civil authority granted either explicitly or tacitly, which on that account is revocable by the civil authority whenever it thinks fit. – Ibid.”

24 declares that the Church has the power of using force. For what purposes it does not say, but it is reasonable to think that it intends to use this force against such beliefs as that are considered condemned in this document, among others. It will be important to remember this for all condemned errors. 25 can only mean that a state, if it had declared itself a Catholic nation or has Catholicism as its official religion, will morally be a good target to use force against in order to bring it back into the fold of Catholicism when condemned error 24 is considered. So if Spain for example revoked Catholicism being its official religion, the Church believes it would be justified in the use of force against it. Isn’t this very similar to the Muslim belief that people who leave the faith should be killed?

“20. The ecclesiastical power ought not to exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government. – Allocution “Meminit unusquisque,” Sept. 30, 1861.”
“42. In the case of conflicting laws enacted by the two powers, the civil law prevails. – Ibid.”

20 makes it obviously clear that the Church considers itself to have power and authority over any civil government without permission. This can be seen as nothing more than an attempt to subvert all governments and establish the Church as the totalitarian ruling force of the world. 42 makes it clear that no matter what a civil law may be, Catholics are obligated to act against it if it conflicts with a Church law. Now we’ll recall Errors 5 and 7 which had stated that divine revelation is perfect, and all laws divinely inspired in the Old and New Testament are to be followed to the letter even if they contradict the civil laws of the residing citizen. Unbelievers are to be killed, raped, put into slavery… if this isn’t totalitarianism, what is? (It is said in the New Testament as well as the old that killing unbelievers and slavery is right and just and God’s will).

 

[Hubriss]

“15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. – Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.”
“77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. – Allocution “Nemo vestrum,” July 26, 1855.”
“78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. – Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.”
“55. The Church ought to be separated from the .State, and the State from the Church. – Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.”

15, 77, and 78 all condemn freedom of religion. If you are a Catholic who lives in a civilized country, or if you are not a Catholic, you know that this is not to be tolerated (unless you believe your religion should be the sole religion to the exclusion of others, then you are not to be tolerated). This belief combined with the belief in use of force poses a threat to all non-Catholic or secular people. 55 condemns separation of church and state. Both freedom of religion and separation of church and state are guaranteed in our US Constitution: The First Amendment Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.

“45. The entire government of public schools in which the youth- of a Christian state is educated, except (to a certain extent) in the case of episcopal seminaries, may and ought to appertain to the civil power, and belong to it so far that no other authority whatsoever shall be recognized as having any right to interfere in the discipline of the schools, the arrangement of the studies, the conferring of degrees, in the choice or approval of the teachers. – Allocutions “Quibus luctuosissimis,” Sept. 5, 1851, and “In consistoriali,” Nov. 1, 1850.”
“46. Moreover, even in ecclesiastical seminaries, the method of studies to be adopted is subject to the civil authority. – Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.”
“47. The best theory of civil society requires that popular schools open to children of every class of the people, and, generally, all public institutes intended for instruction in letters and philosophical sciences and for carrying on the education of youth, should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority, control and interference, and should be fully subjected to the civil and political power at the pleasure of the rulers, and according to the standard of the prevalent opinions of the age. – Epistle to the Archbishop of Freiburg, “Cum non sine,” July 14, 1864.”
45, 46, and 47 are all justifications for meddling control by the Catholic Church on education. This belief has been struck down in Judicial Court cases. The most recent is the last Kitzmiller vs Dover School District case in which the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools as a valid scientific theory was struck down as it was not science, but religious, and therefore unconstitutional.

“56. Moral laws do not stand in need of the divine sanction, and it is not at all necessary that human laws should be made conformable to the laws of nature and receive their power of binding from God. – Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.”
“57. The science of philosophical things and morals and also civil laws may and ought to keep aloof from divine and ecclesiastical authority. – Ibid.”
These are further attempts to influence and control laws in civil societies.

So, you are not Catholic (or are a cafeteria Catholic) if you believe any of the following (I imagine most of us will agree with most or all of these. At least we should if we are American.):

-Freedom of religion
-Separation of church and state
-The Bible is not divinely inspired or perfectly true. Some of the stories in the Bible are merely stories and just intended to convey a message. They didn’t actually happen.
-If laws in the Bible or teachings of holy men, including Jesus, contradict the sensible laws and reasoning we have today, our civil laws and reasoning should reform the early laws and actions of the Church.
-The Church does not have the power to use force.
-The Church does not have the power to act over and against any civil government, and its laws are not to be followed over any governments’ if there are contradictions.
-The Church should not have complete control over the education of children and all peoples.
-Morality is not dependant on divine revelation.

 

[LilyM]

So, you are not Catholic (or are a cafeteria Catholic) if you believe any of the following (I imagine most of us will agree with most or all of these. At least we should if we are American.):

-Freedom of religion
-Separation of church and state
-The Bible is not divinely inspired or perfectly true. Some of the stories in the Bible are merely stories and just intended to convey a message. They didn’t actually happen.
-If laws in the Bible or teachings of holy men, including Jesus, contradict the sensible laws and reasoning we have today, our civil laws and reasoning should reform the early laws and actions of the Church.
-The Church does not have the power to use force.
-The Church does not have the power to act over and against any civil government, and its laws are not to be followed over any governments’ if there are contradictions.
-The Church should not have complete control over the education of children and all peoples.
-Morality is not dependant on divine revelation.

You’re misreading the quotes to come up with this one. The quotes refer to the truth of prophecies and miracles as contained in the Bible - not the entirety of every word of the thing.

Quite obviously, for example, the Psalms and Song of Songs are poetry and and not literally true! And Jesus himself used stories, called parables, to illustrate different points. They quite clearly are also not literally true. Same with Revelation - it’s prophecy and true, but also full of imagery which may or may not be literally what will happen.

See there’s moral truth and literal truth. The Bible is not a work of modern history nor a science textbook, so the sort of literal truth in every single last particular we expect from a work of modern history or science is not to be expected from the Bible.

 

[porthos11]

These are very fundamentalist ideas. The Catholic Church believes that all of scripture is divinely inspired, and 5 says that the revelation is perfect. This would mean that it is an error to not believe literally in Creationism, and believe that all the stories that are not obviously stories (Psalms, Jesus stories, Proverbs I think)

No, that’s not what it means. The Church affirms that Revelation closed with the death of St. John. But there is nothing mythical about the Bible, and all the Church is doing is affirming that the prophecies and miracles contained therein are true. This does not address the matter of literary genre, such as the liturgical Creation hymn of Genesis 1, which allows both the Creationist and evolutionary views. The point is, God made it.

But yes, the Gospels really happened.

24 declares that the Church has the power of using force. For what purposes it does not say, but it is reasonable to think that it intends to use this force against such beliefs as that are considered condemned in this document, among others. It will be important to remember this for all condemned errors. 25 can only mean that a state, if it had declared itself a Catholic nation or has Catholicism as its official religion, will morally be a good target to use force against in order to bring it back into the fold of Catholicism when condemned error 24 is considered. So if Spain for example revoked Catholicism being its official religion, the Church believes it would be justified in the use of force against it. Isn’t this very similar to the Muslim belief that people who leave the faith should be killed?

You have the wrong interpretation. Look at the words carefully. Prop. 24 simply allows the Church the use of force. That, by the way, is similar in principle to your own Second Amendment. It does not say for what purpose at all. You’re the one reading things into the text. But the Church can and will use force to protect itself against persecution. The Church does not call for the killing of apostates, and neither does it attack nations that repudiate an official religion.

Prop. 25 simply means that the Church’s civil or temporal power is independent of any state or civil government.

20 makes it obviously clear that the Church considers itself to have power and authority over any civil government without permission. This can be seen as nothing more than an attempt to subvert all governments and establish the Church as the totalitarian ruling force of the world.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! It does not assert power and authority over the civil government. It just says that it does not answer to any civil government. Thank God for that, by the way.

42 makes it clear that no matter what a civil law may be, Catholics are obligated to act against it if it conflicts with a Church law.
Take your pick: abortion? contraception? euthanasia? Gay marraige? The Church is held to a higher law. Your beloved democratic institutions have legalized these abominations. The Church NEVER will. So which prevails again?

Now we’ll recall Errors 5 and 7 which had stated that divine revelation is perfect, and all laws divinely inspired in the Old and New Testament are to be followed to the letter even if they contradict the civil laws of the residing citizen.

Where do you find in Church teaching that this is the way we interpret the Scriptures? Your ignorance of our own beliefs, understandings, and centuries of Scriptural history shows. Where do you find in Catholic teaching that we are to follow the Bible in a literalistic manner? Where?

Unbelievers are to be killed, raped, put into slavery… if this isn’t totalitarianism, what is? (It is said in the New Testament as well as the old that killing unbelievers and slavery is right and just and God’s will).

Where does the Church teach this? Where?

All those stories are perfect and remain inspired of God. That DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE ARE TO DO THEM! These are meant to teach us religious truth. We are not to follow their disciplines, but the moral truth behind them remains valid forever.

But I think you’re just out to slander the Church rather than really seek to understand what she teaches. Instead of taking the Syllabus of Errors at face value, you instead attach the worst impossible interpretations. There’s a reason the Syllabus is formulated negatively. The horrible scenarios you picture come from your own twisted mind.

 

[Spirithound]

“15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. – Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.”
“77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. – Allocution “Nemo vestrum,” July 26, 1855.”
“78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. – Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.”
“55. The Church ought to be separated from the .State, and the State from the Church. – Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.”

Alright mate, these are really 15 separate threads.
I’m responding just to these ones in hopes that you actually will start a bunch of threads.
15 is referring to the paths to salvation. It speaks against relativism and religious apathy.
77. In this one, you clearly demonstrate that you have no idea how to invert an idea. The teaching of this one is that it IS expedient for the Catholic faith to be the only one, for the reason implied by #15.
I’m sure the crux of 78 lies in the meaning of “public”
As for 55, look where it’s got us.

 

[adrift]

I’ve recently been looking up information on separation of church and state, and I came across an interesting article that mentioned some “errors” that the Catholic Church had condemned, which included the separation of church and state and freedom of religion. I looked further and came across this document:

papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm

I
Remember, these are beliefs that Pius IX condemned, so the opposite of them are the beliefs that are supposed to be considered Truth.
The first ones that jumped out at me were:
“5. Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason. – Ibid.”
“7. The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth.”

These are very fundamentalist ideas. The Catholic Church believes that all of scripture is divinely inspired, and 5 says that the revelation is perfect. This would mean that it is an error to not believe literally in Creationism, and believe that all the stories that are not obviously stories (Psalms, Jesus stories, Proverbs I think) are actually perfect and totally true. Laws such as stoning, murdering and raping enemies, the right to have slaves, etc, are not to be subject to the advancement of human reasoning and are to be followed even if we find them objectionable today. 7 states that all miracles and prophecies are completely true all in the NT and OT. They are not stories, they actually happened.
The mistake you are making is defining perfect as literal. The revelation is perfect in what is conveying. The perfect truth, say in Genesis, is that God created all things.
”

.

 

[adrift]

1. The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth.”

7 states that all miracles and prophecies are completely true all in the NT and OT. They are not stories, they actually happened.

 

[adrift]

“24. The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect. – Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.”

The Apostolic letter Ad Apostolicae

Apostolic letter issued against Emperor Frederick II by Pope Innocent IV (1243-54), during the Council of Lyons, 17 July, 1245, the third year of his pontificate.

Force is accomplished in many ways. Excommunication is a form of force. Why do you suppose that this letter is quoted in this context? I would think to show why the statement was false.

 

[adrift]

“25. Besides the power inherent in the episcopate, other temporal power has been attributed to it by the civil authority granted either explicitly or tacitly, which on that account is revocable by the civil authority whenever it thinks fit. – Ibid.”

The authority of the Church does not come from civil authority. It comes from God.

 

[adrift]

1. The ecclesiastical power ought not to exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government. – Allocution “Meminit unusquisque,” Sept. 30, 1861.”
   “42. In the case of conflicting laws enacted by the two powers, the civil law prevails. – Ibid.”

20 makes it obviously clear that the Church considers itself to have power and authority over any civil government without permission. This can be seen as nothing more than an attempt to subvert all governments and establish the Church as the totalitarian ruling force of the world. 42 makes it clear that no matter what a civil law may be, Catholics are obligated to act against it if it conflicts with a Church law. Now we’ll recall Errors 5 and 7 which had stated that divine revelation is perfect, and all laws divinely inspired in the Old and New Testament are to be followed to the letter even if they contradict the civil laws of the residing citizen. Unbelievers are to be killed, raped, put into slavery… if this isn’t totalitarianism, what is? (It is said in the New Testament as well as the old that killing unbelievers and slavery is right and just and God’s will).

20 makes it obviously clear that the Church considers itself to have power and authority over any civil government without permission.

Wrong what it is saying is that the Church does not have to have the permission of the government. When there are two powers in conflict the civil government does not prevail. So your whole premise is based on a false understanding of what is being said.

 

[Hubriss]

You’re misreading the quotes to come up with this one. The quotes refer to the truth of prophecies and miracles as contained in the Bible - not the entirety of every word of the thing.

Quite obviously, for example, the Psalms and Song of Songs are poetry and and not literally true! And Jesus himself used stories, called parables, to illustrate different points. They quite clearly are also not literally true. Same with Revelation - it’s prophecy and true, but also full of imagery which may or may not be literally what will happen.

See there’s moral truth and literal truth. The Bible is not a work of modern history nor a science textbook, so the sort of literal truth in every single last particular we expect from a work of modern history or science is not to be expected from the Bible.

No, I’m not misreading it. Prophecies and miracles usually don’t depend on morality. This DOES say that all miracles and prophecies are true, and had happened/will happen exactly how it says so in the Bible. Miracles do not only include the healing of the blind or the sick or the raising of the dead. A miracle is divine intervention by God in the universe by which the ordinary course and operation of Nature is overruled, suspended, or modified. Miracles in the Bible then would also include the Great Flood, food falling from the sky, the 10 plagues of Egypt, when God decides to smite any man down, etc. I know I acknowledged Psalms and Songs as being just stories. As for revelation it says that the prophecies are not the fiction of poets or myths.

15 is referring to the paths to salvation. It speaks against relativism and religious apathy.
77. In this one, you clearly demonstrate that you have no idea how to invert an idea. The teaching of this one is that it IS expedient for the Catholic faith to be the only one, for the reason implied by #15.
I’m sure the crux of 78 lies in the meaning of “public”
As for 55, look where it’s got us.

15 does not just refer to the paths of salvation. It says “Every man is free to embrace and profess that…” In a man’s own mind he is always free to believe whatever he wants, there is no way to control that. But it also says “profess.” The only way to keep a man from professing is through physical action.

I know exactly how to invert 77. It says that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State. The State is the country, ruled by the government. 77 explicitly means that the government should control religious freedom, specifically making Catholicism he only allowed religion to be worshiped.

As for 55. Separation of church and State has gotten us a great deal. We avoided warfare and struggle within the country based on religion. We’ve had many great scientific advancements. We know how life had arisen and how humans were ultimately born on the Earth through Darwinian Evolution. America has been considered to be the greatest country in the world, although we may now be losing that due to the huge increase of religious influence on politics. We’ve had great proliferation of ideas less impeded by religious dogmas (The Enlightenment). I’m sure you can think of many more ways it has increased prestige of our society.

And so as for 78, you’re right that the key resides in public. People would not be able to express their true faith publicly in a Catholic country.

 

[adrift]

Alright mate, these are really 15 separate threads.
I’m responding just to these ones in hopes that you actually will start a bunch of threads.
15 is referring to the paths to salvation. It speaks against relativism and religious apathy.
77. In this one, you clearly demonstrate that you have no idea how to invert an idea. The teaching of this one is that it IS expedient for the Catholic faith to be the only one, for the reason implied by #15.
I’m sure the crux of 78 lies in the meaning of “public”
As for 55, look where it’s got us.

You know he is right this is way more than one subject per thread as per forum rules.

You have misinterpreted badly.

 

[PapaSquash]

“20. The ecclesiastical power ought not to exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government. – Allocution “Meminit unusquisque,” Sept. 30, 1861.”
“42. In the case of conflicting laws enacted by the two powers, the civil law prevails. – Ibid.”

20 makes it obviously clear that the Church considers itself to have power and authority over any civil government without permission. This can be seen as nothing more than an attempt to subvert all governments and establish the Church as the totalitarian ruling force of the world.

Hard to know where to start, but I’ll grab this chunk because it’s easy.

The Church claims no authority over government. It claims authority over it’s members, the people of God, the body of Christ. It rejects the idea that a civil government can grant or withhold permission to exert that authority.

For example, the Church has the authority to say that abortion is wrong and that procuring an abortion results in automatic excommunication. We reject the idea that a government can say that we have to allow people who favor allowing abortion to be in communion with us. It also says that, as a member of this Church I am required to disobey civil laws that would, if I followed them, result in the comission of an intrinsically evil act.

 

[Hubriss]

The mistake you are making is defining perfect as literal. The revelation is perfect in what is conveying. The perfect truth, say in Genesis, is that God created all things.

-Adrift
When you read the Bible, it is perfectly well understood that it intends to convey a historical account of the acts of God, his miracles, what actually happened. And 5 is saying that this is perfect. In the mid 19th century you didn’t have any Catholic apologists who said that the stories were not meant to be literal and that they merely conveyed vague, cherry picked truths. The purpose of this Syllabus of Errors was to condemn notions such as that.

The Apostolic letter Ad Apostolicae

Force is accomplished in many ways. Excommunication is a form of force. Why do you suppose that this letter is quoted in this context? I would think to show why the statement was false.

It is clear that 24 means physical force that is normally reserved these days for governments. This is obviously clear when it states that the Church has Temporal Power. Temporal power is that power that the Church declares itself to have which is just like the power of countries (for example it has the power to wage war).

A bit on temporal power here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_power

The authority of the Church does not come from civil authority. It comes from God.

Again, it does not talk about spiritual power, but temporal power. The political power of governments.

Wrong what it is saying is that the Church does not have to have the permission of the government. When there are two powers in conflict the civil government does not prevail. So your whole premise is based on a false understanding of what is being said.

-Adrift

Ecclesiastical power refers to the spiritual power of the Church. So I guess it means the spiritual power that it has over its people. It still means that if there are two laws in conflict with each other, the people must follow the Catholic law instead of the State one.

You know he is right this is way more than one subject per thread as per forum rules.

You have misinterpreted badly.

-adrift
This is not more than one subject. This all falls under the subject of the Syllabus of Errors showing clearly how Catholicism is totalitarian.

 

[adrift]

Adrift
When you read the Bible, it is perfectly well understood that it intends to convey a historical account of the acts of God, his miracles, what actually happened. And 5 is saying that this is perfect. In the mid 19th century you didn’t have any Catholic apologists who said that the stories were not meant to be literal and that they merely conveyed vague, cherry picked truths. The purpose of this Syllabus of Errors was to condemn notions such as that.

Understood by who?
It is not an historical account although it does contain some history. It is a theological account and that is where it is perfect. The accounts are literal but not literalist. Can you provide any apologist of the 19th century who says differently?

Again, it does not talk about spiritual power, but temporal power. The political power of governments.

What type of power is it talking about? It is saying the government cannot tell the Church what to do. An example of this would be the present day Chinese government.

t is clear that 24 means physical force that is normally reserved these days for governments. This is obviously clear when it states that the Church has Temporal Power. Temporal power is that power that the Church declares itself to have which is just like the power of countries (for example it has the power to wage war).

At the time this was true, at the time the Vatican did have this power. You do know that it is a country?

Ecclesiastical power refers to the spiritual power of the Church. So I guess it means the spiritual power that it has over its people. It still means that if there are two laws in conflict with each other, the people must follow the Catholic law instead of the State one.

Abortion is the law of the land. Catholics may not follow it.

This is not more than one subject. This all falls under the subject of the Syllabus of Errors showing clearly how Catholicism is totalitarian.

The Syllabus itself has more than one subject.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

For those interested,

Avery Cardinal Dulles, in an article in First Things, has some interesting notes about how we should read The Syllabus.

You might want to take a look Hubriss, as it speaks to at least one or two of your points.

VC

 

[Petergee]

No, I’m not misreading it. Prophecies and miracles usually don’t depend on morality. This DOES say that all miracles and prophecies are true, and had happened/will happen exactly how it says so in the Bible. Miracles do not only include the healing of the blind or the sick or the raising of the dead. A miracle is divine intervention by God in the universe by which the ordinary course and operation of Nature is overruled, suspended, or modified. Miracles in the Bible then would also include the Great Flood, food falling from the sky, the 10 plagues of Egypt, when God decides to smite any man down, etc. I know I acknowledged Psalms and Songs as being just stories. As for revelation it says that the prophecies are not the fiction of poets or myths.

If you don’t believe in divine miracles or prophecies, you can hardly even call yourself a Christian, let alone a Catholic.

As for 55. Separation of church and State has gotten us a great deal. We avoided warfare and struggle within the country based on religion. We’ve had many great scientific advancements. We know how life had arisen and how humans were ultimately born on the Earth through Darwinian Evolution. America has been considered to be the greatest country in the world, although we may now be losing that due to the huge increase of religious influence on politics. We’ve had great proliferation of ideas less impeded by religious dogmas (The Enlightenment). I’m sure you can think of many more ways it has increased prestige of our society.

And so as for 78, you’re right that the key resides in public. People would not be able to express their true faith publicly in a Catholic country.

Pius IX was not condemning the “separation of Church and State” which the USA had (at least de jure, apart from the anti-Catholic provisions of some States until about 1890) from 1789 to the mid-20th century, and which came about precisely because the Catholics (along with the Quakers) of the newly independent States insisted upon it as a condition of joining the union.
He was condemning the system prevailing and professed by militant anti-clerical and proto-Marxist European revolutionaries of his time, a milder form of which is now being promoted in the USA, under which if the Church was allowed to exist at all it is only under sufference of the State and as a subsidiary totally controlled by the State. Quite the opposite of what reasonable people today mean by “separation”.

 

[Spirithound]

I know exactly how to invert 77. It says that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State. The State is the country, ruled by the government. 77 explicitly means that the government should control religious freedom, specifically making Catholicism he only allowed religion to be worshiped.

Expediency. You keep eliminating the word expedient.

As for 55. Separation of church and State has gotten us a great deal. We avoided warfare and struggle within the country based on religion. We’ve had many great scientific advancements. We know how life had arisen and how humans were ultimately born on the Earth through Darwinian Evolution. America has been considered to be the greatest country in the world, although we may now be losing that due to the huge increase of religious influence on politics. We’ve had great proliferation of ideas less impeded by religious dogmas (The Enlightenment). I’m sure you can think of many more ways it has increased prestige of our society.

Alright, prove it. Prove that each of those things would not have been accomplished without a separation of Church and State. Prove the Darwinian evolution is correct.

 

[Hubriss]

Understood by who?
It is not an historical account although it does contain some history. It is a theological account and that is where it is perfect. The accounts are literal but not literalist. Can you provide any apologist of the 19th century who says differently?

Was not the Great Flood divine intervention? Is it not divine intervention when God smites a person down? Were rainbows not explained as divine intervention after the Great Flood? Was it not divine intervention when God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah? Was it not divine intervention when Jesus fed the poor, healed the sick, raised the dead? Did God not plague the Egyptians with 10 different curses? Did he not split the sea and destroy the Egyptians following the Jews? A miracle is anything that occurs with supposed divine intervention. Anything that happens in the Bible as described to have divine intervention is a miracle. And miracles in the Bible as said Error #7 are all true, actual happenings.

What type of power is it talking about? It is saying the government cannot tell the Church what to do. An example of this would be the present day Chinese government.

-adrift
It is saying that the Church as a religious figure has the power of governments.

Abortion is the law of the land. Catholics may not follow it.

-adrift
Ah, so you agree that Catholics should not make abortion against the law correct? Abortion is not the law of the land, people now have the choice whether to have one or not.

For those interested,

Avery Cardinal Dulles, in an article in First Things, has some interesting notes about how we should read The Syllabus.

You might want to take a look Hubriss, as it speaks to at least one or two of your points.

-Verbum Caro
It only really talks about freedom of religion. Freedom of religion was very clearly prohibited by errors 15, 77, and 78. But that article talks about Vatican II approving of freedom of religion. Seems that papal infallibility is being contradicted here.

If you don’t believe in divine miracles or prophecies, you can hardly even call yourself a Christian, let alone a Catholic.

-Petergee

Do you believe in the Great Flood? Do you believe God actually smote people over trivial matters? Do you really believe in revelation? If you read the Bible, there are many instances of divine intervention that you will find to be non-rational, having no evidence or reason, and down right objectionable. And yet ALL of these instances of miracles(divine intervention) are declared to be perfect revelation.

Pius IX was not condemning the “separation of Church and State” which the USA had (at least de jure, apart from the anti-Catholic provisions of some States until about 1890) from 1789 to the mid-20th century, and which came about precisely because the Catholics (along with the Quakers) of the newly independent States insisted upon it as a condition of joining the union.
He was condemning the system prevailing and professed by militant anti-clerical and proto-Marxist European revolutionaries of his time, a milder form of which is now being promoted in the USA, under which if the Church was allowed to exist at all it is only under sufference of the State and as a subsidiary totally controlled by the State. Quite the opposite of what reasonable people today mean by “separation”.

-Petergee
The Communist Manifesto was published in 1848. The error of separation of church and state was not likely made in reaction to communism. There is a section in the Syllabus of Errors with the heading of socialism, communism, secret societies, biblical societies, and clerico-liberal societies, but all it does is basically declare them pests.

However the section where the separation of church and state is condemned in is titled: “Errors about civil society, condemned both in itself and its relation to the Church.” This very clearly includes the separation of church and state which made up one of the core liberties of American society. Pius IX declared this belief to be an “error about civil society in itself.”

 

[Hubriss]

Quote:
As for 55. Separation of church and State has gotten us a great deal. We avoided warfare and struggle within the country based on religion. We’ve had many great scientific advancements. We know how life had arisen and how humans were ultimately born on the Earth through Darwinian Evolution. America has been considered to be the greatest country in the world, although we may now be losing that due to the huge increase of religious influence on politics. We’ve had great proliferation of ideas less impeded by religious dogmas (The Enlightenment). I’m sure you can think of many more ways it has increased prestige of our society.
Alright, prove it. Prove that each of those things would not have been accomplished without a separation of Church and State. Prove the Darwinian evolution is correct.

-Spirithound
If we did not have separation of church and state and one was able to declare itself the head of the American government, the situation in America would have been just like the one that all the people who sought freedom from religious persecution had just left. In Europe there were wars amongst Christian sects and persecution back and forth which has continued greatly until more recently in countries like Ireland.

Your request of me to prove to you that evolution is correct only strengthens my point.

I highly recommend you and every Catholic on these forums go to this website:
pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/
and watch these consecutive clips of a 2 hour documentary on a recent court case pitting intelligent design against evolution:
pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html