Pope Pius IX, Vatican I, and Pope Pius X

Currently I am reading the book In God’s Name by David Yallop. Unlike other authors who write glowingly about Popes Pius IX and X, and Vatican Council I, Mr. Yallup goes in the other direction. So, instead of the trio can do no wrong, he is under the impression they did no right. The truth is somewhere in between these two extremes.

Would anyone know of any factual, and I stress factual, books written, without being slanted by the author(s) personal bent, on either one or all of the three subjects?

I am only interested in reading facts. I don’t need an author to make up my mind for me, or lead me to draw a conclusion that the book has already predetermined. I have noticed the latter done in many books. A reader is groomed for a few hundred pages to accept what is finally written in the last one hundred or so pages. I don’t want that.

Sorry to sound like Sargent Friday, but just give me the facts. :slight_smile: :thumbsup:

Is this the book that you are referring to:

Claims that Pope John Paul I was murdered?

Yes. But what the author claims regarding Popes Pius IX and X, and how the proclamation of infallibility was politically maneuvered at Vatican I, I have read on occasion elsewhere. I just brought the Yallop book up because it happens to be one I am currently reading.

There must be somewhere a book that just contains facts that aren’t embellished to slant either left or right. That is why I created this thread. I am hoping I can be given the name(s) of the book(s) so I can read them.

What kind of things would be in such a book? It seems to me that it would have to report the documents of Vatican I, the proclamation of the council, and the starting and ending dates of the council. Once you start getting into motivations, though, I think you automatically enter territory where an author has to make judgments. He can’t just report the facts about peoples’ motivations because their motivations are in their hearts, which we can’t know. So what could you report?

Yallop’s book makes some provocative points. I wonder about the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility and why it was used only once, and on something relatively minor. Could some of the later Popes consider it unncessasary baggage?

The only writers interested in the subjects would be either those attacking the Church for the refusal to succumb to 19th century materialist fantasies of social progress and those agreeing that the popes - for some reason Leo XIII is missing from the list- took courageous and correct action. Wherever the vicar of Christ are concerned, it’s the same as with their Lord - there are no books that just ’ present the facts,’ other than the gospels, which do present the facts, but facts which are not at all neutral but require either assent or rejection.

You are correct that Pope Leo XIII is usually given “a pass”. :slight_smile: The two focal points are Popes Pius IX and X.

One of the neglects to which St. Pius X is subjected is his vigorous attempts to prevent the Great War, carried on by Benedict XV. Apart from the combats against modernism and materialist utopianism, the Holy See worked very hard to combat the militaristic racial nationalism that was coming to the fore in international relations.

eViLpOpTaRt #6
I wonder about the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility and why it was used only once, and on something relatively minor. Could some of the later Popes consider it unncessasary baggage?

All false as the supreme authority of the Pope in doctrinal teaching is known explicitly from Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, Chapter 4, and Vatican II, *Lumen Gentium *25, to be that “definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable.”

The three levels of teaching are:
**1) Dogma – infallible (Canon #750.1) **to be believed with the assent of divine and Catholic faith.
2) Doctrine – infallible (Canon #750.2) requires the assent of ecclesial faith, to be “firmly embraced and held”.
3) Doctrine – non-definitive (non-infallible) and requires intellectual assent (“loyal submission of the will and intellect”, Vatican II, *Lumen Gentium 25), not an assent of faith. [See the Explanatory Note on ATF by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith]

**Answer by David Gregson of EWTN on Nov-22-2002: **
“You are correct in stating that the Pope exercises his charism of infallibility not only in dogmatic definitions issued, ex cathedra, as divinely revealed (of which there have been only two), but also in doctrines definitively proposed by him, also ex cathedra, which would include canonizations (that they are in fact Saints, enjoying the Beatific Vision in heaven), moral teachings (such as contained in Humanae vitae), and other doctrines he has taught as necessarily connected with truths divinely revealed, such as that priestly ordination is reserved to men. Further details on levels of certainty with which the teachings of the Magisterium (either the Pope alone, or in company with his Bishops) may be found in Summary of Categories of Belief.” [My underlining]

Based on the fact that Yollop has written books about the “murder” of Pope John Paul I and the “dark heart” of JP II, this author seems to be more interested in sensationalism than in scholarship. I have read a few books on the two popes you mention and Vatican I, and they all are written from a particular point of view. You may need to look for a history of the Church to get a more “neutral” background. Even then, you must remain alert for adjectives and adverbs that place a slant on the person or action being described. This may mean reading more than one to get a proper balance.

You should find the following very helpful:
The Crisis of Christendom, Vol. 6, in A History of Christendom, by Dr Warren H Carroll and Anne W Carroll, Christendom Press, 2013.

It covers 1815-2005.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.