
I, N.,
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.
Furthermore,
with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the
condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the
encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those
concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the
error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can
contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which
they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic
view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and
reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian
assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of
a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things
that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises
which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to
the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I
reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture
which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of
faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the
misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or
restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm.
Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor
lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first
put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of
Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve
all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the
writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles,
excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment
that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.
Finally, I
declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists
who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is
far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the
result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one
to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact,
namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent
have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and
his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath
the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly
is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from
the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be
tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the
culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth
preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to
be different, may never be understood in any other way.
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.