Denzinger EN 2867

The Conventions of the Theologians of Germany *

[From the letter, "Tuas libenter," to the Archbishop of Munich-Freising, Dec. 21, 1863]

2875 Dz 1679 . . . Indeed we were aware, Venerable Brother, that some Catholics who devote their time to cultivating the higher studies, trusting too much in the powers of human ability, have not been frightened by the dangers of errors, lest, in asserting the false and insincere liberty of science, they be snatched away beyond the limits beyond which the obedience due to the teaching power of the Church, divinely appointed to preserve the integrity of all revealed truth, does not permit them to proceed. Therefore, it happens that Catholics of this sort are unhappily deceived, and often agree with those who decry and protest against the decrees of this Apostolic See and of Our Congregations, that they (decrees) hinder the free progress of science [see n. 1712]; and they expose themselves to the danger of breaking those sacred ties of obedience by which, according to the will of God, they are bound to this same Apostolic See which has been appointed by God as the teacher and defender of truth.

2876 Dz 1680 Nor, are We ignorant that in Germany also there prevailed a false opinion against the old school, and against the teaching of those supreme doctors [see n. 1713], whom the universal Church venerates because of their admirable wisdom and sanctity of life. By this false opinion the authority of the Church itself is called into danger, especially since the Church, not only through so many continuous centuries has permitted that theological science be cultivated according to the method and the principles of these same Doctors, sanctioned by the common consent of all Catholic schools, but it (the Church) also very often extolled their theological doctrine with the highest praises, and strongly recommended it as a very strong buttress of faith and a formidable armory against its enemies. . . .

2877 Dz 1681 Indeed, since all the men of this assembly, as you write, have asserted that the progress of science and its happy result in avoiding and refuting the errors of our most wretched age depend entirely on a close adherence to revealed truths which the Catholic Church teaches, they themselves have recognized and professed that truth, which true Catholics devoted to cultivating and setting forth knowledge, have always held and handed down. And so, relying on this truth, these wise and truly Catholic men could cultivate these sciences in safety, explain them, and make them useful and certain. And this could not be achieved if the light of human reason, circumscribed by limits in investigating those truths also which it can attain by its own powers and faculties, did not venerate above all, as is just, the infallible and uncreated light of the divine intellect which shines forth wonderfully everywhere in Christian revelation. For, although those natural disciplines rely on their own proper principles, apprehended by reason, nevertheless, Catholic students of these disciplines should have divine revelation before their eyes as a guiding star, by whose light they may guard against the quicksands of errors, when they discover that in their investigations and interpretations they can be led by them (natural principles)--as often happens---to profess those things which are more or less opposed to the infallible truth of things which have been revealed by God.

2878 Dz 1682 Hence, We do not doubt that the men of this assembly, knowing and professing the truth mentioned above, have wished at one and the same time clearly to reject and repudiate that recent and preposterous method of philosophizing which, even if it admits divine revelation as an historical fact, nevertheless, submits the ineffable truths made known by divine revelation to the investigations of human reason; just as if those truths had been subject to reason, or, as if reason, by its own powers and principles, could attain understanding and knowledge of all the supernal truths and mysteries of our holy faith, which are so far above human reason that it can never be made fit to understand or demonstrate them by its own powers, and on its own natural principles [see n. 1709]. Indeed, We honor with due praise the men of this same convention because, rejecting, as We think, the false distinction between philosopher and philosophy, about which We have spoken in our other letter to you [see n. 1674], they have realized and professed that all Catholics in their learned interpretations should in conscience obey the dogmatic decrees of the infallible Catholic Church.

2879 Dz 1683 While, in truth, We laud these men with due praise because they professed the truth which necessarily arises from their obligation to the Catholic faith, We wish to persuade Ourselves that they did not wish to confine the obligation, by which Catholic teachers and writers are absolutely bound, only to those decrees which are set forth by the infallible judgment of the Church as dogmas of faith to be believed by all [see n. 1722]. And We persuade Ourselves, also, that they did not wish to declare that that perfect adhesion to revealed truths, which they recognized as absolutely necessary to attain true progress in the sciences and to refute errors, could be obtained if faith and obedience were given only to the dogmas expressly defined by the Church. For, even if it were a matter concerning that subjection which is to be manifested by an act o f divine faith, nevertheless, it would not have to be limited to those matters which have been defined by express decrees of the ecumenical Councils, or of the Roman Pontiffs and of this See, but would have to be extended also to those matters which are handed down as divinely revealed by the ordinary teaching power of the whole Church spread throughout the world, and therefore, by universal and common consent are held by Catholic theologians to belong to faith.

2880 Dz 1684 But, since it is a matter of that subjection by which in conscience all those Catholics are bound who work in the speculative sciences, in order that they may bring new advantages to the Church by their writings, on that account, then, the men of that same convention should recognize that it is not sufficient for learned Catholics to accept and revere the aforesaid dogmas of the Church, but that it is also necessary to subject themselves to the decisions pertaining to doctrine which are issued by the Pontifical Congregations, and also to those forms of doctrine which are held by the common and constant consent of Catholics as theological truths and conclusions, so certain that opinions opposed to these same forms of doctrine, although they cannot be called heretical, nevertheless deserve some theological censure.

The Unity of the Church *

[From the letter of the Sacred Office to the bishops of England, Sept. 16, 1864.]

2885 Dz 1685 It has been made known to the Apostolic See that some Catholic laymen and ecclesiastics have enrolled in a society to "procure" as they say, the unity of Christianity, established at London in the year 1857, and that already many journalistic articles have been published, which are signed by the names of Catholics approving this society, or which are shown to be the work of churchmen commending this same society.

But certainly, I need not say what the nature of this society is, and whither it is tending; this is easily understood from the articles of the newspaper entitled THE UNION REVIEW, and from that very page on which members are invited and listed. Indeed, formed and directed by Protestants, it is animated by that spirit which expressly avows for example, that the three Christian communions, Roman Catholic, Greekschismatic, and Anglican, however separated and divided from one another, nevertheless with equal right claim for themselves the name Catholic. Admission, therefore, into that society is open to all, wheresoever they may live, Catholics, Greek-schismatics, and Anglicans, under this condition, however, that no one is permitted to raise a question about the various forms of doctrine in which they disagree, and that it is right for each individual to follow with tranquil soul what is acceptable to his own religious creed. Indeed, the society itself indicates to all its members the prayers to be recited, and to the priests the sacrifices to be celebrated according to its own intention: namely, that the said three Christian communions, inasmuch as they, as it is alleged, together now constitute the Catholic Church, may at some time or other unite to form one body. . . .

2886 Dz 1686 The foundation on which this society rests is of such a nature that it makes the divine establishment of the Church of no consequence. For, it is wholly in this: that it supposes the true Church of Jesus Christ to be composed partly of the Roman Church scattered and propagated throughout the whole world, partly, indeed, of the schism of Photius, and of the Anglican heresy, to which, as well as to the Roman Church, "there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism" (cf. Ep 4,5).

2887 Surely nothing should be preferable to a Catholic man than that schisms and dissensions among Christians be torn out by the roots and that all Christians be "careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Ep 4,3). . . . But, that the faithful of Christ and the clergy should pray for Christian unity under the leadership of heretics, and, what is worse, according to an intention, polluted and infected as much as possible with heresy, can in no way be tolerated.

2888 The true Church of Jesus Christ was established by divine authority, and is known by a fourfold mark, which we assert in the Creed must be believed; and each one of these marks so clings to the others that it cannot be separated from them; hence it happens that that Church which truly is, and is called Catholic should at the same time shine with the prerogatives of unity, sanctity, and apostolic succession. Therefore, the Catholic Church alone is conspicuous and perfect in the unity of the whole world and of all nations, particularly in that unity whose beginning, root, and unfailing origin are that supreme authority and "higher principality''* of blessed PETER, the prince of the Apostles, and of his successors in the Roman Chair. No other Church is Catholic except the one which, founded on the one PETER, grows into one "body compacted and fitly joined together" (Ep 4,16) in the unity of faith and charity. . . .

Dz 1687 Therefore, the faithful should especially shun this London society, because those sympathizing with it favor indifferentism and engender scandal.

Naturalism, Communism, Socialism *

[From the Encyclical, "Quanta cura,'' Dec. 8, 1864]

Dz 1688 Moreover, although We have not failed to proscribe and frequently condemn the most important errors of this sort, nevertheless, the cause of the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls divinely entrusted to Us, and the good of human society itself, demand that We again arouse your pastoral solicitude to overcome other base opinions which spring from these same errors as from fountains. These false and perverted errors are to be the more detested because they have this goal in mind: to impede and remove that salutary force which the Catholic Church, according to the institution and command of her divine founder, must exercise freely "unto the consummation of the world" (Mt 28,20), no less toward individual men, than toward nations, peoples, and their highest leaders; and to remove that mutual alliance of councils between the sacerdotal ministry and the government, and that "happy concord which has always existed, and is so salutary to sacred and civil affairs." *

Dz 1689 For, surely you know, Venerable Brothers, that at this time not a few are found who, applying the impious and absurd principles of naturalism, as they call it, to civil society, dare to teach that "the best plan for public society, and civil progress absolutely requires that human society be established and governed with no regard to religion, as if it did not exist, or at least, without making distinction between the true and the false religions." And also, contrary to the teaching of Sacred Scripture, of the Church, and of the most holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "the best condition of society is the one in which there is no acknowledgment by the government of the duty of restraining, by established penalties, offenders of the Catholic religion, except insofar as the public peace demands."

Dz 1690 And, from this wholly false idea of social organization they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, especially fatal to the Catholic Church and to the salvation of souls, called * by Our predecessor of recent memory, GREGORY XVI, insanity; namely, that "liberty of conscience and of worship is the proper right of every man, and should be proclaimed and asserted by law in every correctly established society; that the right to all manner of liberty rests in the citizens, not to be restrained by either ecclesiastical or civil authority; and that by this right they can manifest openly and publicly and declare their own concepts, whatever they be, by voice, by print, or in any other way." While, in truth, they rashly affirm this, they do not understand and note that they are preaching a "liberty of perdition," * and that "if human opinions always have freedom for discussion, there could never be wanting those who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the eloquence of human (al. mundane) wisdom, when faith and Christian wisdom know from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ how much it should avoid such harmful vanity." *

2890 Dz 1691 And since, when religion has been removed from civil society, and when the teaching and authority of divine revelation have been repudiated; or the true notion of justice and human right is obscured by darkness and lost; and when in place of true justice and legitimate right, material force is substituted, then it is clear why some, completely neglecting and putting aside the certain principles of sound reason, dare to exclaim: "The will of the people, manifested as they say by public opinion, or in some other way, constitutes the supreme law, freed from all divine and human right; and, that deeds consummated in the political order, by the very fact that they have been consummated, have the force of right." But who does not see and plainly understand that a society of men who are released from the bonds of religion and of true justice can have no other aim, surely, than the goal of amassing and heaping up wealth, and that it (society) can follow no other law in its actions except an uncontrolled cupidity of soul, a slave to its own pleasures and advantages ?

Dz 1692 Therefore, men of this sort pursue with bitter hatred religious orders, no matter how supremely deserving because of their Christian, civil, and literary work; and they cry out that these same orders have no legitimate reason for existing, and in this way approve the falsehoods of heretics. For, as Our predecessor of recent memory, PIUS VI, very wisely taught, "abolition of the regulars wounds the status of the public profession of the evangelical counsels; it injures the way of life approved in the Church as suitable to the apostolic teaching; it harms the most distinguished founders whom we venerate on our altars, who established these orders only when inspired by God.''*

2891 Dz 1693 And they also make the impious pronouncement that from the citizens and the Church must be taken away the power "by which they can ask for alms openly in the cause of Christian charity," and also that the law should be repealed "by which on some fixed days, because of the worship of God, servile works are prohibited," pretending most deceitfully that the said power and law obstruct the principles of the best public economy. And, not content with removing religion from public society, they wish even to banish religion itself from private families.

Dz 1694 For, teaching and professing that most deadly error of communism and socialism, they assert that "domestic society or the family borrows the whole reason for its existence from the civil law alone; and, hence, all rights of parents over their children, especially the right of caring for their instruction and education, emanate from and depend wholly on the civil law."

2892 Dz 1695 In these impious opinions and machinations these most deceitful men have this particular intention: that the saving doctrine and power of the Catholic Church be entirely eliminated from the instruction and training of youth, and that the tender and impressionable minds of youths may be unfortunately infected and ruined by every pernicious error and vice. For, all who have tried to disturb not only the ecclesiastical but also the public welfare, and to overturn the just order of society, and to destroy all rights, divine and human, have always formed all their evil plans, studies, and work to deceive and deprave especially unsuspecting youth, as we have intimated above, and have placed all their hopes in the corruption of youth. Therefore, they never cease to harass in every unspeakable way both clergy (secular and regular), from whom, as the genuine documents of history splendidly testify, have flowed so many great advantages for Christian, civil, and literary society; and they never cease to declare that the clergy "as an enemy to the true and useful progress of science and government, must be removed from all responsibility and duty of instructing and training youth."

2893 Dz 1696 But, in truth, others, renewing the evil and so-many-times-condemned fabrications of the innovators, dare with signal impudence to subject the supreme authority of the Church and of this Apostolic See, given to it by Christ the Lord, to the judgment of the civil authority, and to deny all rights of the same Church and See with regard to those things which pertain to the exterior order.

2894 Dz 1697 For, they are not at all ashamed to affirm that "the laws of the Church do not bind in conscience, except when promulgated by the civil power; that the acts and decrees of the Roman Pontiffs relating to religion and the Church, need the sanction and approval, or at least the assent, of the civil power; that the Apostolic Constitutions,* in which secret societies are condemned, whether an oath of secrecy is demanded in them or not, and their followers and sympathizers are punished with anathema, have no force in those regions of the world where societies of this sort are allowed by the civil government; that the excommunication uttered by the Council of Trent and the Roman Pontiffs against those who invade and usurp the rights and possessions of the Church rests upon a confusion between the spiritual order and the civil and political order for the attaining of a mundane good only; that the Church should decree nothing which could bind the consciences of the faithful in relation to the use of temporal goods; that to the Church does not belong the right to coerce by temporal punishments violators of its laws; that it is conformable to the principles of sacred theology, and to the principles of public law for the civil government to claim and defend the ownership of the goods which are possessed by churches, by religious orders, and by other pious places."

2895 Dz 1698 Nor do they blush to profess openly and publicly the axiom and principle of heretics from which so many perverse opinions and errors arise. For they repeatedly say that "the ecclesiastical power is not by divine right distinct from and independent of the civil power, and that the distinction and independence of the same could not be preserved without the essential rights of the civil power being invaded and usurped by the Church." And, we cannot pass over in silence the boldness of those who "not enduring sound doctrine" (2Tm 4,3), contend that "without sin and with no loss of Catholic profession, one can withhold assent and obedience to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to relate to the general good of the Church and its rights and discipline, provided it does not touch dogmas of faith or morals." There is no one who does not see and understand clearly and openly how opposed this is to the Catholic dogma of the plenary power divinely bestowed on the Roman Pontiff by Christ the Lord Himself of feeding, ruling, and governing the universal Church.

2896 Dz 1699 In such great perversity of evil opinions, therefore, We, truly mindful of Our Apostolic duty, and especially solicitous about our most holy religion, about sound doctrine and the salvation of souls divinely entrusted to Us, and about the good of human society itself, have decided to lift Our Apostolic voice again And so all and each evil opinion and doctrine individually mentioned in this letter, by Our Apostolic authority We reject, proscribe, and condemn; and We wish and command that they be considered as absolutely rejected, proscribed, and condemned by all the sons of the Catholic Church.

"Syllabus," or Collection of Modern Errors *

[Excerpted from various Allocutions, Encyclicals, Epistles of PIUS IX, together with (the above quoted) Bull, "Quanta cure," edited Dec. 8, 1864]

A. Index of the Acts of Pius IX, from which the Syllabus is excerpted

Dz 1700
1. The Encyclical Letter, "Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846 (to this are referred the propositions of the Syllabus 4--7, 16]. 40, 63).

2. The Allocution, "Quisque vestrum," Oct. 4,1847 (Prop. 63).

3. The Allocution, "Ubi primum," Dec. 17, 1847 (Prop. 16].

4. The Allocution, "Quibus quantisque," Apr. 20, 1849 (Prop. 40, 64,76).

5. The Encyclical Letter, "Nostis et Nobiscum," Dec. 8, 1849 (Prop.

6. The Allocution, "Si semper antea," May 20, 1850 (Prop. 76).

7. The Allocution, "In consistoriali," Nov. 1, 1850 (Prop. 43, 45).

8. The Condemnation, "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851 (Prop. 15, 21,23, 30, 51, 54, 68)9. The Condemnation, "Ad apostolicae," Aug. 22, 1851 (Prop. 24, 25, 34 36, 38, 41, 42, 65 67, 69--75).

10. The Allocution, "Quibus luctuosissimis," Sept. 5, 1851 (Prop. 45).

11. Letter to the KING of Sardinia, Sept. 9, 1852 (Prop. 73).

12. The Allocution, "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852 (Prop. 31, 51, 53, 55, 67, 73,74, 78).

13. The Allocution, "Singular) quadam," Dec. 9, 1854 (Prop. 8, 17, 19).

14. The Allocution, "Probe memineritis," Jan. 22,1855 (Prop. 53).

15. The Allocution, "Cum saepe," July 26, 1855 (Prop. 53). 16]

16. The Allocution, "Nemo vestrum," July 26, 1855 (Prop. 77).

17. The Encyclical Letter, "Singular) quidem," Mar. 17., 1856 (Prop.4, 16].).

18. The Allocution, "Nunquam fore," Dec. (15), 1856 (Prop. 26, 28, 29, 31, 46, 50, 52, 79).

19. The Letter, "Eximiam tuam," to the Archbishop of Cologne, June 15, 1857 (Prop. 14 NB)

20. The Apostolic Letter, "Cum catholica Ecclesia," Mar. 26,1860 (Prop. 63, 76 NB)

21. The Letter, "Dolore haud mediocri," to the Bishop of Wratislava (Breslau), Apr. 30, 1860 (Prop. 14 NB).

22. The Allocution, "Novos et ante," Sept. 28, 1860 (Prop. 19, 62,76, NB).

23. The Allocution, "Multis gravibusque," Dec. 17., 1860 (Prop 37, 43,73).

24. The Allocution, "Iamdudum cernimus," Mar. 18, 1861, (Prop. 37, 61,76, Nb 80).

25. The Allocution, "Meminit unusquisque," Sept. 30, 1861 (Prop. 20).

26. The Allocution, "Maxima quidem," June 9, 1862 (Prop. 1--7, (15),19, 27, 39, 44, 49, 56--60, 76, NB)

27. The Letter, "Gravissimas inter," to the Archbishop of Munich-Freising, Dec. II, 1862 (Prop. 9--11).

28. The Encyclical Letter, "Quanto conficiamur moerore," Aug. 10, 1863 (Prop. 17., 58).

29. The Encyclical Letter, "Incredibili," Sept. 17., 1863 (Prop. 26).

30. The Letter, "Tuas libenter," to the Archbishop of Munich-Freising,

Dec. 21, 1863 (Prop. 9, 10, 12--14,, 22, 33).

31. The Letter, "Cum non sine," to the Archbishop of Friburg, July14, 1864 (Prop. 47,48).

32. The Letter, "Singularis Nobisque," to the Bishop of Montreal (?), Sept. 29, 1864 (Prop. 32).

B. Syllabus*

Comprising the particular errors of our age, which are noted in consistorial Allocutions, in Encyclical and other Apostolic Letters of His Holiness, our Lord Pope Pius IX *

Sec. 1. Pantheism, Naturalism, and Absolute Rationalism

2901 Dz 1701 1. No supreme, all wise, and all provident divine Godhead exists, distinct from this world of things, and God is the same as the nature of things and, therefore, liable to changes; and God comes into being in man and in the universe, and all things are God and they have the same substance of God; and God is one and the same as the world, and therefore, also, spirit is one and the same with matter, necessity with liberty, the true with the false, the good with the evil, and the just with the unjust (26).*

2902 Dz 1702 2. All action of God upon men and the world must be denied (26).

2903 Dz 1703 3. Human reason, with absolutely no regard to God, is the only judge of the true and the false, the good and the evil; it is a law unto itself and is, by its own natural powers, suffcient to provide for the good of individuals and of peoples (26).

2904 Dz 1704 4.All truths of religion flow from the natural power of human reason; hence, reason is the chief norm by which man can and should come to a knowledge of all truths of whatever kind (1, 17., 26).

2905 Dz 1705 5. Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to continuous and indefinite progress, which corresponds to the progress of human reason (1 [cf. n. 1636] 26).

2906 Dz 1706 6. The faith of Christ is opposed to human reason; and divine revelation is not only of no benefit to, but even harms the perfection of man ( 1 [see n. 1635] 26).

2907 Dz 1707 7. The prophecies and miracles described and related in Sacred Scripture are the inventions of poets; and the mysteries of the Christian faith are the culmination of philosophical investigations; and in the books of both Testaments are contained mythical inventions; and Jesus Christ Himself is a mythical fiction (1,26).

Sec. II. Modified Rationalism

2908 Dz 1708 8. Since human reason is equal to religion itself, therefore, theological studies must be conducted just as the philosophical 13. [see n. 1642]).

2909 Dz 1709 9. All the dogmas of the Christian religion without distinction are the object of natural science or philosophy; and human reason, cultivated so much throughout history, can by its natural powers and principles arrive at the true knowledge of all, even the more hidden dogmas, provided these dogmas have been proposed to reason itself as its object (27, 30 [see n. 1682]).

2910 Dz 1710 10. Since a philosopher is one thing and philosophy another, the former has the right and the duty to submit himself to the authority which he himself has proved to be true; but philosophy cannot and should not submit itself to any authority (27 [see n. 1673] 30 [see n. 1674])

2911 Dz 1711 11. The Church should not only never pay attention to philosophy, but should also tolerate the errors of philosophy, and leave it to correct itself (27 [see n. 1675]).

2912 Dz 1712 12. The decrees of the Apostolic See and of the Roman Congregations hinder the free progress of science (30 [see n. 1679]).

2913 Dz 1713 13. The method and principles according to which the ancient scholastic doctors treated theology are by no means suited to the necessities of our times and to the progress of the sciences (30 [see n. 1680]).

2914 Dz 1714 14. Philosophy is to be treated without any regard to supernatural revelation (30).

N.B. To the system of rationalism are closely connected in great part the errors of Anthony Guenther which are condemned in the Epistle to the Card. Archbishop of Cologne, "Eximiam tuam," Jun. 15, 1857 (19) [see n. 1655], and in the Epistle to the Bishop of Breslau, "Dolore haud mediocri," Apr. 30,

Sec. III. Indifferentism, Latitudinarianism

2915 Dz 1715 15 Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which he, led by the light of reason, thinks to be the true religion (8, 26).

2916 Dz 1716 16. In the worship of any religion whatever, men can find the way to eternal salvation, and can attain eternal salvation (1, 3, 17).

2917 Dz 1717 17. We must have at least good hope concerning the eternal salvation of all those who in no wise are in the true Church of Christ 13. [see n. 1646] 28 [see n. 1677]).

2918 Dz 1718 18. Protestantism is nothing else than a different form of the same true Christian religion, in which it is possible to serve God as well as in the Catholic Church (5).

Sec. IV. Socialism, Communism, Secret Societies, Biblical Societies, Clerico-liberal Societies

1718a Evils of this sort have been reproved often and in very severe words in the Encyclical Letter, "Qui Pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846 (1); in the Allocution, "Quibus quantisque," Apr. 20,1849 (4); in the Encyclical Epistle, "Nostis et Nobiscum," Dec. 8, 1849 (5); in the Allocution, "Singular) quadam," Dec. 9, 1854 13. in the Encyclical Epistle, "Quanto conficiamur moerore," Aug. IO, 1863 (28).

Sec. V. Errors Concerning the Church and Its Rights

2919 Dz 1719 19. The Church is not a true and perfect society absolutely free, nor does it operate by its own fixed and proper rights conferred on it by its divine founder; but it belongs to the civil power to define which are the rights of the Church, and the limits within which it may exercise these rights (13, 23, 26).

2920 Dz 1720 20. The ecclesiastical power should not exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government (25).

2921 Dz 1721 21. The Church does not have the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion (8).

2922 Dz 1722 22. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and writers are absolutely bound is restricted to those matters only which are proposed by the infallible judgment of the Church, to be believed by all as dogmas of faith (30 [see n. 1683]).

2923 Dz 1723 23. The Roman Pontiffs and the Ecumenical Councils have trespassed the limits of their powers, have usurped the rights of princes, and have even erred in defining matters of faith and morals (8).

2924 Dz 1724 24. The Church does not have the power of using force, nor does it have any temporal power, direct or indirect (9).

2925 Dz 1725 25. Besides the power inherent in the episcopate, there is another temporal power attributed, either expressly or tacitly granted by the civil government, to be revoked, therefore, at will by the civil government (9).

2926 Dz 1726 26. The Church does not have a natural and legitimate right to acquire and to possess (18, 29).

2927 Dz 1727 27. The sacred ministers of the Church and the Roman Pontiff should be entirely excluded from all administration and dominion over temporal things (26).

2928 Dz 1728 28. Without the permission of the government, it is not lawful for bishops to issue even Apostolic Letters 18

2929 Dz 1729 29. Favors granted by the Roman Pontiff should be considered void, unless they have been requested through the government (18).

2930 Dz 1730 30. The immunity of the Church and of ecclesiastical persons had its origin in civil law (8).

2931 Dz 1731 31, The ecclesiastical court for the temporal cases of clerics, whether civil or criminal, should be absolutely abolished, even if the Apostolic See was not consulted, and protests 12. 18

2932 Dz 1732 32. Without any violation of natural right and equity, the personal immunity by which clerics are exempted from the obligation of undergoing and practicing military service, can be abolished; in truth, civil progress demands this abrogation, especially in a society organized on the form of a more liberal government (32)

2933 Dz 1733 33. It does not belong exclusively to the ecclesiastical power of jurisdiction, by proper and natural right, to direct the teaching of theological matters (30).

2934 Dz 1734 34. The doctrine of those who compare the Roman Pontiff to a free prince acting in the universal Church is a doctrine which prevailed in the Middle Ages (9).

2935 Dz 1735 35. There is nothing to forbid that by the vote of a General Council or by the action of all peoples the Supreme Pontificate be transferred from the Roman Bishop and THE CITY to another bishopric and another city (9).

2936 Dz 1736 36. The definition of a national council allows no further discussion, and the civil administration can force the matter to those boundaries (9).

2937 Dz 1737 37. National churches can be established which are exempt and completely separated from the authority of the Roman Pontiff (23, 24).

2938 Dz 1738 38. The excessive decisions of the Roman Pontiffs contributed too much to the division of the Church into East and West (9).

Denzinger EN 2867