Rorate Caeli

Nations, sovereignty, sacrifices, rights

The Nations, particularly the middle-sized and small ones, ask that their fate be placed in their own hands. They might be led to contract, with their full assent, in the interest of common progress, bonds that modify their sovereign rights. But, after having sustained their share, their great share, of sacrifices for the destruction of the system of brutal violence, they have the right of not accepting that a new political or social system be imposed upon them that the vast majority of their populations flatly rejects.
Pius XII
Allocution "Nell'accogliere",
on the end of the War in Europe
June 2, 1945

26 comments:

David Werling said...

Someone please send this quote to Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.

Malta said...

How about we pass this to Brussels, with its drive to pressure abortion on all member countries?

Daniel Arseno said...

Parvioribus et mediocribus civitatibus novas res sive novos ordines sociales inferre nihil aliud est quam eis dominari. Immo si necessitas defuerit, ista subiugatio vehementissime vituperanda est. Sicut enim scripsit Augustinus noster:

An forte displicet bonis iniquissima improbitate pugnare et finitimos quietos nullamque iniuriam facientes ad dilatandum regnum bello spontaneo provocare? Plane si ita sentiunt approbo et laudo. Videant ergo ne forte non pertineat ad viros bonos gaudere de regni latitudine. Iniquitas enim eorum, cum quibus iusta bella gesta sunt, regnum adiuvit ut cresceret, quod utique parvum esset, si quies et iustitia finitimorum contra se bellum geri nulla provocaret iniuria ac sic felicioribus rebus humanis omnia regna parva essent concordi vicinitate laetantia et ita essent in mundo regna plurima gentium, ut sunt in urbe domus plurimae civium. Proinde belligerare et perdomitis gentibus dilatare regnum malis videtur felicitas, bonis necessitas. Sed quia peius esset, ut iniuriosi iustioribus dominarentur, ideo non incongrue dicitur etiam ista felicitas. Sed procul dubio felicitas maior est vicinum bonum habere concordem quam vicinum malum subiugare bellantem. Mala vota sunt optare habere quem oderis vel quem timeas, ut possit esse quem vincas. (De civitate Dei, iv, 14, 15.)

Lee Lovelock-Jemmott said...

I second Malta's comment. Sooner rather than later.

Joe B said...

Funny you should pick the two pro-life Catholics in the race, David.

Prester John said...

Daniel Arseno,

You chose Latin because it's something most readers of this blog are easily familiar with? Or perhaps because there is no translation? But surely, if you were able to read it, you could translate for us.

While I realize that the loss of fluency in Latin is a hallmark of decline in our civilization, and while I agree with the maxim that no one may be called truly educated without that fluency in Latin, I also want to offer this advice: Posting your entire comment, and the quote, in Latin (when you know the majority of readers won't be able to read it) makes it appear that the comment was posted more for your own sake than for the sake of the readership.

Would you be willing to repost in English?

Daniel Arseno said...

Dear Prester John:

My comment was destined to those who can read it. If I were to translate it into English, there would be no reason to read it in Latin. For some people, there seems to always be a good reason not to use Latin.

Do you have anything to say about the quote from Pius XII?

Prester John said...

Mr. Arseno,

"My comment was destined to those who can read it. If I were to translate it into English, there would be no reason to read it in Latin."

But then, why post it on an English-speaking blog. And for that matter, why did New Catholic post the quote from Pius XII in English.

Is the goal simply to post something accessible to a minority of people who read this blog, or to contribute to the overall discussion?

Knight of Malta said...

Mr. Arseno,

Please continue to post in Latin; I like a mental exercise from time-to-time, even though my Latin sucks (I'm working on it)!


Also, since this is by now an international forum, and Latin is (or was) the language of the world (of course, English is now, lamentably, the language of the business world, but that's another topic altogether), and is still the official language of the Church, it is perfectly appropriate to post it in a forum such as this, which focuses on Church matters.

But for those who don't know Latin, you can cut and paste into Google Translate; it's not perfect, but still fun to use!

Jason W said...

This blog comes up in an aggregated Catholic feed I subscribe to. I am confused whether or not if it considers itself to be in communion with the pope. Can someone elaborate?

bedwere said...

Macte virtute, Daniel! Discant enim homines, praesertim Catholici, linguam Latinam.

New Catholic said...

LOL, Jason W... Can a blog "consider itself" to be "in communion with" the Pope? All our contributors are, we can assure you of that...

Jason W said...

Thank you New Catholic. I was curious because of the comments I've seen on this thread and others claiming that the Novus Ordo is "wicked" or has "bad fruits".

I can understand a personal preference for the TLM, but to go so far as to refer to the Novus Ordo as somehow being inherently wicked is a shocking lack of charity and a disregard for the teaching authority of the church that defines the Novus Ordo as valid.

New Catholic said...

Jason, we hear and read about the Traditional Mass being "wicked", "anti-Biblical", even "untraditional" all the time; Liberal "liturgists" love throwing such notions around. But we learn not to be too sensitive.

But you will not hear us defending the NO here: it is valid, if the conditions for validity are met, no doubt about that. Period.

M. A. said...

"Liberal "liturgists" love throwing such notions around. But we learn not to be too sensitive."

Funny!

How about sexist, paternalistic, antiquated, Dark Ages liturgy, a dinosaur,smells and bells liturgy, stagnated, ritualistic, anti-communitarian,elitist, ostentatious, legalistic, ossified, dead liturgy, clericalistic, a throwback, anti-unity, divisive,spectator worship, schismatic,...

:-)

Long-Skirts said...

M.A. said:

"How about sexist,"

M.A. how could you forget misogyinist!!!

Jason W said...

That would be strange. I have never seen any statements condemning the TLM. There definitely isn't any mainstream movement that does that. I could see some ultra-liberal factions that do that, but then again, they tend to be heretical - so they wouldn't really sway opinion anyway.

Bill G said...

M.A.

May God bless you, and please pray for me, as I will surely do the same for you.

I, too, am struggling with anger. I have been trying to say and do things with love.

I love you, as you are a child of God, as are we all.

Pax tecum

M. A. said...

Longskirts, I thought sexist covered it. But, I like that word, misogynist. It reminds me of the fermented soybean paste. Heck, we might as well add "miso" also, since it could be claimed that we are all fermented.

Please feel to add it to the list.

Bill G., be assured of my prayers, although I can tell you that I am not angry. I'm just feeling a little fermented, that's all.

God bless! I would very much appreciate your prayers!

Thomas Putnam said...

Jason W wrote, "I have never seen any statements condemning the TLM. There definitely isn't any mainstream movement that does that."

Interesting; indeed, fascinating. I thought that even hospital "bubble" environments and laboratory clean rooms had cable TV and high-speed Internet connections nowadays. Live and learn, I suppose.

Reluctant Pessimist said...

An inadequate scholar offers the following, with prayerful forgiveness sought from Saint Jerome, the holy patron of translators.

To impose new systems or new social orders upon poorer or less advanced states is nothing other than to lord it over them. Indeed, if necessary restraint has been wanting, the imposition of such a yoke ought to be denounced in the most forceful terms. For thus has our [honored] Augustine written:

But perhaps it is displeasing to good men to fight with most wicked unrighteousness, and provoke with voluntary war neighbors who are peaceable and do no wrong, in order to enlarge a kingdom. If they feel thus, I entirely approve and praise them.

Let them ask, then, whether it is quite fitting for good men to rejoice in extended empire. For the iniquity of those with whom just wars are carried on favors the growth of a kingdom, which would certainly have been small if the peace and justice of neighbors had not by any wrong provoked the carrying on of war against them; and human affairs being thus more happy, all kingdoms would have been small, rejoicing in neighborly concord; and thus there would have been very many kingdoms of nations in the world, as there are very many houses of citizens in a city. Therefore, to carry on war and extend a kingdom over wholly subdued nations seems to bad men to be felicity, to good men inevitability. But because it would be worse that the injurious should rule over those who are more righteous, therefore even that is not unsuitably called felicity. But beyond doubt it is greater felicity to have a good neighbor at peace, than to conquer a bad one by making war. Your wishes are bad, when you desire that one whom you hate or fear should be in such a condition that you can conquer him.
(City of God, book 4, chapters 14 and 15 [excerpts])

Incidentally, Prester John, I wholeheartedly second your comments to and apropos our poor man's Tacitus.

Barbara said...

Jason W wrote:

"I have never seen any statements condemning the TLM. There definitely isn't any mainstream movement that does that. I could see some ultra-liberal factions that do that, but then again, they tend to be heretical - so they wouldn't really sway opinion anyway."

Instead they do sway opinion. And you hear continuously condemnations of the TLM in the mainstream Church at large, even from prelates sometimes. It has been a kind of social- conditioning / brainwashing that has occurred since Vatican II where all the adjectives quoted by M.A. are thrown around right, left and centre. Sometimes the 'condemnation' is milder in tone e.g. 'the people NOW understand more since the vernacular Mass was introduced.' (it isn't true). The liturgical crisis and consequently the crisis in the Church Herself wouldn't exist if this weren't the case. It would seem to me that most of the 'mainstream' Church to greater or lessser degrees opposes the TLM. If someone can tell me with facts that this isn't true I would be very happy indeed.

Barbara

Daniel Arseno said...

Callide litteras meas atque doctoris Augustini vertisti, gratiasque libenter agerem nisi in fine addideris te Iohanni omnino assentiri, meque (ut aliquid de me detrahas) appelaveris "parvum Tacitum". Eoque miror quod aliquid pensi litteras meas habes. Non modo eas legisti, sed ita dignas censuisti ut eas verteres. Vale quam latinissime.

Prester John said...

Mr. Arseno,

I'm not sure how to put this except to be fully blunt; right now, instead of looking like someone who loves Latin and is attempting to restore it to its proper place in academic and Liturgical life (and I don't fit you caricature of someone finding a "good reason" not to use Latin), you look like a nerdy kid showing off what he knows compared to everyone else, rather than engaging in substantive conversation.

Reluctant Pessimist said...

Dear Prester John: Anent your last comment: amen.

In support of your reluctantly expressed view, note too that when Mr. Arseno asked above, "Do you have anything to say about the quote from Pius XII?" he implied that he had himself "said" something about it. He hadn't; he had merely paraphrased the pope's words quoted in the original post and then followed it with a passage from The City of God that is accessible in, say, fifty or sixty reliable translations in each of the usual Western languages.

Dear Mr. Arseno: Et cum spiritu tuo. Tibi valedico.

Bill G. said...

M.A,

I misread your post and misjudged where you were coming from. I still ask for prayers, but more for my lack if reading comprehension on the tiny, tiny screen of my I phone!

Pax!

Bill G.