It is said that the celebration of the Reformation day can no longer be marked by the contrast to the Counter-Reformation.
The general rejoining of protestant theology to the papist theology is not an event limited to the religious sphere, to the private sphere, but it is a political event. In fact, Catholicism is a political doctrine using Christian religiosity to pursue its own dreadful hegemonic project extended to all humanity (1). Catholicism is nothing but “papism”, i.e. theological fascism.
Rapprochement between the two areas has the effect of proposing Catholicism as religion of western society. It thus would cease to be the religiosity of its southern part (Italy, Spain, Portugal, central and south America), the results of the Peace of Westfalia, ending the Thirty Years War (1618-1648), would be reversed.
This may be the way of starting also the link between the catholic leadership and the capitalistic lobbies (2), similar to what happened in the past when there was a similar link between that leadership and the roman landowners lobbies first and the feudal ones later.
The political nature of protestantism joining in the roman papism is therefore highly relevant. Through it, in fact, western society is about to go back to the papal control. Papism would lead to the final collapse of the “Declaration of human rights” (which was voted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948), defined as a terrible system (“horrendum systema”) (3), with the consequences that the tragic historical experience widely supports. And in fact, where the human rights prevail, peace, justice and prosperity are built. Where the charitas catholica reigns they are denied, with the result that violence, injustice, poverty, religious superstition prevail.
The Church of Rome comes to this appointement preserving intact its own theology (see Concilium Vaticanum II, Const. dogm. “Dei verbum”), so that Protestantism, by entering into dialogue with it, contradicts the evangelical precept: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him; for whoever greets him shares in his evil works” (2 Gv 10-11).
Thus the terms of the issue at stake in the celebration of the Reformation Anniversary are cleared up.
The following pages are meant to prevent the rapprochement between the two areas on the basis of precise theological motivations that have actually another equally precise political meaning.
In this regard, the Reformed Churches, in particular the Lutheran one, are asked the following questions which can only be answered positively or negatively (tertium non datur). The negative answers are followed by the opposition and maintenance of protestant religiosity, while the positive answers are followed by the lost of protestant identity (sola Scriptura, sola gratia; sola fides, solus Christus, soli Deo gloria), its confluence into Papism, the triumph of Counter-Reformation, the development of bases for the establishment of the capitalistic Middle Ages.
Quaestio prima
Whether we can agree with the statement that “the Roman Pontiff […] [is] Vicar of Christ” (4).
Quaestio secunda
Whether we can agree that the munus regendi belongs to the “Primatus Petri” in the following terms: “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the [catholic] Church alone” (5).
Quaestio tertia
Whether we can agree with the statement that the Pope, as “Vicar of Christ” (“vicarius Christi”) on Earth, enjoys the prerogative of infallibility (6).
Quaestio quarta
Whether we can accept the following proposition: “the Pope […] is given the status of judge and lord over the same sacred scripture, over the word of God” (7).
Quaestio quinta
Whether we can agree with the following statement: “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing” (8).
Quaestio sexta
Whether we can agree on the following proposition: “the dogmatic statements of the Council of Trent retain indeed all their value” (9).
Quaestio septima
Whether we can agree with the Creed, in the part where, after claiming “I believe in God” (10), it declares: “I believe in the Holy Catholic Church” (11).
Quaestio octava
Whether the following dogma can be accepted: “Outside the [catholic] Church there is no salvation” (12).
Quaestio nona
Whether we can agree the statement that: “we say, we state, we establish that being submitted to the roman pontiff is, for every human creature, necessary for salvation” (13).
Quaestio decima
Whether we can admit the separation of the Catholic Church from the civil society and its higher position, according to the following formula: “The Church, because of its commission and competence, is not to be confused in any way with the political community” (14).
Quaestio undecima
Whether we can admit the supremacy of the civitas Dei catholica (luminare maius) over the State (luminare minus), with the result that, “the civil power is submitted to the spiritual one (the Catholic Church) as the body is submitted to the soul” (15).
Quaestio duodecima
Whether we can shared the qualification of the human rights as “overflowing source of evil” (“causa malorum uberrima”), “false opinion” (“prava opinio”), “delirious raving” (“deliramentum”), (16), “most pestilent error” (“pestilentissimus error”), “immoderate liberty” (“immoderata libertas”), “greatest impudence” (“summa impudentia”) (17), “death of the soul” (“mors animae”) (18), “dreadful […] system” (“horrendum […] systema”) (19), “most serious error” (“gravissimus error”) (20).
Quaestio tertia decima
Whether we can consider as “a pretext the contrast between the rights of conscience and the objective strength of the law interpreted by the Church” (21).
Quaestio quarta decima
Whether we can agree with the following declaration of intent: “The long-awaited goal of full unity should not lead to a dull uniformity but rather to the integration of every legitimate [c.n.] diversity in a organic communion of which the successor of Peter [the Pope] is called to be the servant and the guarantor” (22).
Quaestio quinta decima
Whether we should reject the following statement: “It is not requisite to reduce the whole Christian Church under one Independent Sovereignty or Head” (23).
Quaestio sexta decima
Whether we should reject the following statement: “[…] it is evident, that the Points in question betwixt the Protestant Church and the Papal Chair cannot be composed by any Council, their Difference arising not barely from Point of Doctrine, but about Domination, Temporal Dignities, and vast Revenues” (24).
(1) Vd. Donati A., La globalizzazione cattolica. Humanitas sub Pontifice, Armando Armando, Roma, 2015.
(2) Vd. Weber M., Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus, in Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Religionssoziologie, I.C.B. Mohr, Tübingen, 1922.
(3) Pius IX, Ep. encycl. “Qui pluribus”, 9. Nov. 1846, in Denzinger H.-Schönmetzer A., Enchiridion Symbolorum Definitionum et Declarationum de rebus fidei et morum36, Herder, Barcinone-Friburgi Brisgoviae-Romae, 1976, n. 2785.
(4) Vd. Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Città del Vaticano, 1997, n. 882. See, also, Leo X, Bulla “Exurge Domine”, Errores M. Luther, Error 25, in Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum…, quoted, n. 1475: “Romanus Pontifex, Petri successor, non est Christi vicarius super omnes totius mundi ecclesias ab ipso Christo in beato Petro institutus”; vd. anche Errores 26 e 27, ivi, nn. 1476-1477.
(5) Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoted, n. 85.
(6) Ubi supra, nn. 891 e 2035; Codex iuris canonici, can. 749, § 1.
(7) Concept reported (and rejected) by Luther M., Adversus Papatum Romae a Sathana fundatum, anno M.D.XLV., in Opera omnia, Tom. VII, Thoms Klug, Witebergae, 1558, f. 451r: “Est enim Papa […] supra ipsam sacram scripturam, supra verbum Dei, dominus et iudex constitutus”.
(8) Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoted, n. 80; Concilium Vaticanum II, Constit. dogmat. “Dei verbum”, in Enchiridion Vaticanum, EDB, Bologna, 1979, § 10, n. 886.
(9) Ioannes Paulus II, Il 450° anniversario del Concilio di Trento, Discorso, 30 aprile 1995, § 9, in L’Osservatore Romano, 2-3 maggio 1995, p. 11: “Le affermazioni dogmatiche del Concilio di Trento conservano naturalmente tutto il loro valore”; Concilium Vaticanum II, Constit. dogmat. “Dei verbum”, Proemio, in Enchiridion Vaticanum, quoted, Vol. I, n. 872.
(10) Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoted, n. 199.
(11) Ubi supra, nn. 748-975.
(12) Ubi supra, nn. 846-848.
(13) Bonifacius VIII, Bulla “Unam Sanctam”, in Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum…, quoted, n. 875: “Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus, diffinimus omnino esse de necessitate salutis”.
(14) Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoted, n. 2245.
(15) Thomas de Aquino, Summa theologiae, II-II, q. 60, a. 6, ad III: “potestas saecularis subditur spirituali [i.e., Ecclesiae Catholicae] sicut corpus animae”; Pius IX, Syllabus, Prop. 42 e 54, in Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum…, quoted, nn. 2942, 2954; Iohannes XXIII, Litt. enc. “Pacem in terris”, in Enchiridion Vaticanum, quoted, Vol. II, n. 20.
(16) Gregorius XVI, Ep. encycl. “Mirari vos”, in Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum…, quoted, n. 2730.
(17) Ubi supra, n. 2731.
(18) Ibidem, quoting Augustinus (Ep. 105 (olim 166), c. 2 § 10, ad Donatistas, PL 33, 400).
(19) Pius IX, Ep. encycl. “Qui pluribus”, 9. Nov. 1846, ubi supra, n. 2785.
(20) Pius IX, Ep. encycl. “Quanto conficiamur”, ubi supra, n. 2865.
(21) Ioannes Paulus II, Discorso ai partecipanti ad un corso promosso dalla Penitenzieria Apostolica, in L’Osservatore Romano, 17/18 Marzo 1997, § 5, p. 7: “[è] pretestuoso contrapporre i diritti della coscienza al vigore obiettivo della legge interpretata dalla Chiesa”.
(22) Ioannes Paulus II, Angelus, 21 Gennaio 1996, quotation from Thurian M., Mater Unitatis Maria intercede per l’unità, in L’Osservatore Romano, 2 Marzo 1996, p. 1 e p. 5: “Il traguardo tanto desiderato della piena unità non dovrà portare a una piatta uniformità, ma piuttosto all’integrazione di ogni legittima diversità in un’organica comunione, della quale il successore di Pietro [il Papa] è chiamato ad essere il servitore e garante”.
(23) Pufendorf S., Of the Nature and Qualification of Religion in Reference to Civil Society, trad. J. Crull, Liberty Fund, Indianapolis, 2002, Sect. 35, p. 75.
(24) Ubi supra, Sect. 38, p. 86.