Chapter 15 - FILL IN HERE

Chapter here. Chapter here. Chapter here. Chapter here. Chapter here. Chapter here.

Chapter here. Chapter here. Chapter here. Chapter here. Chapter here. Chapter here.

The Great Betrayal

To reconcile the Church with the Revolution, such is the concern of the Liberals called Catholics.

Unknown

To the Catholic doctrine of the social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the union between Church and State, the Liberals, claiming to be Catholics, object that it is doubtlessly true, but inapplicable, even in the Catholic countries:

-In theory, one can accept the thesis proposed by the popes and the theologians.

-In practice, one must yield to circumstances and place himself resolutely into the hypothesis: to promote religious pluralism and the liberty of forms of worship:

The liberal Catholics have not ceased responding that they have a will for orthodoxy equal to that of the most intransigent and a sole concern for the interests of the Church; the conciliation that they have sought is not theoretical or abstract, but practical.1

This is the famous distinction between the thesis (doctrine) and the hypothesis (practice in given circumstances). This distinction, I ask you to observe, is susceptible of a correct interpretation: the application of principles must take the circumstances into consideration, and this is done by circumspection, which is a part of the virtue of prudence. Thus, the presence in a Catholic nation of large Moslem, Jewish, and Protestant minorities can prompt a tolerance of these cults in a city otherwise Catholic by a State that continues to recognize the true Religion, because it believes in the social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ!

Be careful! For the liberal Catholics, that is not the question! According to them, in practice, the principles, which are nevertheless by definition rules of action, must not be applied or advocated because they are inapplicable, they say. This is obviously false: must we renounce the preaching and the application of the commandments of God, “Thou shalt have only one God,” “Thou shalt not kill,” “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” because people want no more of this? Because modern mentality tends to the liberation from all moral rules? Is it necessary to renounce the social Kingship of Jesus Christ in a country under the pretext that Mohammed or Buddha wants a place there? In short, they refuse to believe in the practical efficacy of the truth. They think that they can still affirm Catholic principles in theory, and act always contrary to these principles: this is the intrinsic incoherence of the so-called liberal Catholics.

Here is what Cardinal Billot, S.J., says of this:

The Liberalism of the “liberal Catholics” escapes all classification and has only one sole distinctive and characteristic note, that of perfect and absolute incoherence.2

The Cardinal remarks that the title of “liberal Catholic” is itself a contradiction in terms, an incoherence, since “Catholic” supposes a subjection to the human and divine order of things, while “liberal” means precisely emancipation from this order, a revolt against Our Lord Jesus Christ.

To finish, here is how Cardinal Billot judges the famous distinction between thesis and hypothesis of the Liberals, claiming to be Catholics:

From the fact that the concrete order of things differs from the ideal conditions of theory, it follows that concrete things will never have the perfection of the ideal; but there follows nothing more.

Thus, from the fact of the existence of dissident minorities in a Catholic nation, it follows that religious unanimity will never be perfectly realized, perhaps, that the social reign of Jesus Christ will never have the perfection that the principles set forth; but it does not follow that this Reign is to be warded off in practice and that religious pluralism should become the rule!

You see then already that there is in liberal Catholicism (a term that I use with repugnance, because it is a blasphemy) a betrayal of the principles that refuse to be admitted, a practical apostasy of the Faith in the social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Deservedly can it be said, “Liberalism is a sin,“3 in speaking of Catholic Liberalism.

There is also—I will come back to this in the following chapter—an intellectual confusion at the bottom of this error, a mania of kept-up confusions, a refusal to define anything: such as this confusion between tolerance and tolerantism: tolerance is a Catholic principle and is, under certain circumstances, a duty of charity and of political prudence towards the minorities. Tolerantism is, on the contrary, a liberal error which wants to grant to all dissidents indiscriminately and under all circumstances, and injustice, the same rights as the ones enjoyed by those who are in the truth, moral or religious. Now, as can be observed in other realms, to make of charity a justice is to upset the social order; it is to kill justice and charity.

chapter-00.md chapter-01.md chapter-02.md chapter-03.md chapter-04.md chapter-05.md chapter-06.md chapter-07.md chapter-08.md chapter-09.md chapter-10.md chapter-11.md chapter-12.md chapter-13.md chapter-14.md chapter-15.md chapter-16.md chapter-17.md chapter-18.md chapter-19.md chapter-20.md chapter-21.md chapter-22.md chapter-23.md chapter-24.md chapter-25.md chapter-26.md chapter-27.md chapter-28.md chapter-29.md chapter-30.md chapter-31.md chapter-32.md chapter-33.md chapter-34.md parse.sh raw.txt chapter-00.md chapter-01.md chapter-02.md chapter-03.md chapter-04.md chapter-05.md chapter-06.md chapter-07.md chapter-08.md chapter-09.md chapter-10.md chapter-11.md chapter-12.md chapter-13.md chapter-14.md chapter-15.md chapter-16.md chapter-17.md chapter-18.md chapter-19.md chapter-20.md chapter-21.md chapter-22.md chapter-23.md chapter-24.md chapter-25.md chapter-26.md chapter-27.md chapter-28.md chapter-29.md chapter-30.md chapter-31.md chapter-32.md chapter-33.md chapter-34.md parse.sh raw.txt chapter-00.md chapter-01.md chapter-02.md chapter-03.md chapter-04.md chapter-05.md chapter-06.md chapter-07.md chapter-08.md chapter-09.md chapter-10.md chapter-11.md chapter-12.md chapter-13.md chapter-14.md chapter-15.md chapter-16.md chapter-17.md chapter-18.md chapter-19.md chapter-20.md chapter-21.md chapter-22.md chapter-23.md chapter-24.md chapter-25.md chapter-26.md chapter-27.md chapter-28.md chapter-29.md chapter-30.md chapter-31.md chapter-32.md chapter-33.md chapter-34.md parse.sh raw.txt

1 DTC. Tome IX, col. 509, article Catholic Liberalism .

2 Father Le Floch, Cardinal Billot, Light of Theology, p. 57.

3 Dom Felix Sarda y Salvany.