Pope Saint Pius X Oath Against Modernism

Have any of you read Pope Saint Pius X’s Oath Against Modernism? Incase you haven’t, here it is. Its very compelling to say the least. I enjoyed it. I think it stands true for all ages.

Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 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.

Read the rest here


hmm, interesting. I wholly agree with Pope Saint Pius X. He was right. He still is.

I agree, and yet the modernists ignore him. In fact, they ignore all the pre-conciliar popes. One would think the Church began with Vatican II the way they teach today.

That article you submitted was quite interesting. I did not know it was rescinded in 1967. I guess the more you read, the more you find out.

It’s true. The days of Catholics sitting back and being able to trust they are getting the truths of the faith from their priests and bishops, are over. It is important to brush up on your traditional cathechism, not the new catechism, and to educate yourself by reading, as you suggested. Read everything pertaining to Traditional Catholic Faith.

my husband actually studies the traditional catechism. its definitely not the same as the one he studied when he was in the RCIA. i read along with him, as he is a new to the faith, and he attended the RCIA but was drawn to traditional Catholicism as i was. i love it. i really do.

Many believe that some of the Vatican II documents were greatly influenced by modernists. Pope Paul had no choice. He had to rescend the Oath to appease the modernists. Can you imagine one of these reformers of the Church saying this?

Oath against Modernism

**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

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. . .

Many believe that some of the Vatican II documents were greatly influenced by modernists. Pope Paul had no choice. He had to rescend the Oath to appease the modernists.

Would you please qualify the underlined part as your personal opinion, rather than dogma? This is utterly false, that the pope bends to the wishes of others. Apparently you have no faith in Christ’s promise to keep His Church from error. When did He depart and let the gates of hell prevail? :rolleyes:

A question. Could Vatican II have been the result of the oath? Could it have been rebellion of some to the traditional and desire of modernism?

Rykell, since you do not receive PMS, please allow me to tell you in this thread that I really appreciated the article by Msgr. Calkins. It has set my heart and soul at ease and encouraged me to embrace my Mother Church and not be afraid of following the wrong leader. Thanks for posting the link.

Thank you, Cat — I have to confess it edified me also. Glad to have helped!

[quote=Kathleen Elsie]A question. Could Vatican II have been the result of the oath? Could it have been rebellion of some to the traditional and desire of modernism?

It may be helpful to read the sentiments of Pope John 23 just prior to the Council.


  1. The salutary results we pray for are these: that the faith, the love, the moral lives of Catholics may be so re-invigorated, so intensified, that all who are at present separated from this Apostolic See may be impelled to strive actively and sincerely for union, and enter the one fold under the one Shepherd.

  2. To achieve greater unanimity in this prayer, Venerable Brethren, We would have you organize a solemn novena to the Holy Spirit in all the parishes of your diocese immediately preceding the Ecumenical Council. The object of this novena will be to beg for an abundance of heavenly light and supernatural aid for the Fathers in council. To all who join in this novena We impart from the Church’s treasury a plenary indulgence, obtainable on the usual conditions.

  1. Then, too, a public act of prayer and propitiation might fittingly be arranged in every diocese and, in conjunction with it, a special course of sermons, to serve as a fervent invitation to the faithful to redouble their works of mercy and penance. By this means they may hope to propitiate Almighty God and thus obtain by their prayers that renewal of Christian life which is one of the principal aims of the coming Council. As Our Predecessor Pius XI so aptly observed: “Prayer and penance are the two potent inspirations sent to us at this time by God, that we may bring back to Him our wayward human race that wanders aimlessly without a guide. They are inspirations that will disperse and remedy the first and foremost cause of all rebellion and unrest, man’s revolt against God.”

  2. Finally, the object of the Ecumenical Council, as everyone knows, will be to render more effective that divine work which our Redeemer accomplished. Christ our Lord accomplished it by being “offered . . . because it was his own will.” He accomplished it not merely by teaching men His heavenly doctrine, but also, and more especially, by pouring out His most precious blood for their salvation.

You might be edified by the Pope’s call to everyone for prayer and particularly penance in order to prepare spiritually before the Council began.

Keep in mind, too, that wonderful statement of Pius XII, which is absolute truth:


  1. Finally it is He who, though unseen, presides at the Councils of the Church and guides them.

I hope this is helpful to you, ma’am.

Thank you.:smiley:

Where do I sign?

Why was the oath rescinded? What is in the oath that made it necessary to abolish it? What priest could object to swearing on the oath against modernism? Can we bring it back or is it too late?

They did. Most of them for quite a few years prior.

As the pope, he has all the authority of Christ. To appease the modernists meant rejecting Christ. He had a choice and he made the wrong one.

Traditionalists seem to have a particular delight in tossing about loosely the term modernist, which I suppose means anyone who is not a traditionalist … and/or who is attending the N.O. liturgy.

Anyone who knows the background of the word “modernist” can recognize how uninformed are those who have no idea of the word’s meaning, and simply parrot all the others who use it. May I ask for the traditionalists’ definition so that we can discuss the matter with full understanding and have everyone on the same page? How exactly do you define a modernist?

I cannot see how anybody here who is labeled a modernist would really fit the description as defined here in tenets 4 thru 65.

This, to me, is the most simple and basic description of a modernist (taken from Catholic Encyclopedia):

A remodelling, a renewal according to the ideas of the twentieth century – such is the longing that possesses the modernists. “The avowed modernists,” says M. Loisy, “form a fairly definite group of thinking men united in the common desire to adapt Catholicism to the intellectual, moral and social needs of today.

Sounds pretty spot on in describing VII, as well as many of the forum members I’ve met here.

Shall we say neo-Catholic instead?

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.