I like to check out the Wikipedia “today in history” page; it turns out that on this date in 1864, Pope Pius IX issued a document called the Syllabus of Errors, which declared a number of concepts popular in the day to be contrary to Catholic theology and traditions. This list included (among others) socialism/Marxism/communism, Protestantism, the separation of Church and State.

My apologies for citing Wikipedia, but that’s where I first learned of the Syllabus a few minutes ago, and leads me to my question. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllabus_ ... prov=sfti1

Is there a reliable source where I can learn more about this document, preferably at a “for dummies” level?

I feel pretty confident that Pope Francis is either ignorant or indifferent regarding the Summary, especially since it contains the following statement of error, which is pretty dadgum clear. (Remember, it’s from a list of statements declared to be commonly expressed, but wrong.)

There's the wikipedia article, I think that's a good and simple intro.

Then there's CA: https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print ... he-context

Can you explain what kind of info you're looking for, please - the syllabus looks mostly clear enough to me.

It actually isn't a magisterial document, it is little more than a list of quotations from previous documents from previous documents Pius had issued.. So while the syllabus itself isn't magisterial, the documents it cites are. But to understand each of the propositions, you really have to read the original source documents from which the quotes are drawn.

So if I understand you correctly, Pope Pius IX is quoting himself? And yet, the Syllabus exists as a litany (for lack of a better term) of erroneous statements- a list of falsehoods that circulate in common dialogue. Did some great epiphany occur that radically changed Pius’ way of thinking? Now I’m even more intrigued (and also more confused).

Pius IX was greatly affected by the revolutions of 1848 and by the final collapse of the Papal States.

I don't think Doom means what you think he means. Maybe he misspoke at least a little. I don't know anything about the genesis of the Syllabus, but it surely isn't made up of a series of quotations from Pius IX in the sense you're taking it. Like in a previous document he had affirmed these lines, and then in the Syllabus he quoted them in order to deny them.

According to the Wikipedia article (IKR), the Papal States didn't collapse until six years after the publication of the Syllabus. Is that statement regarding the timing also erroneous?

Check the wiki again. Though the official end wasn't until 1870, the practical end was 1861.

Note also that what Pope Pius IX meant by "liberalism" isn't the same as what we'd mean by it today. Certainly there's overlap, but they aren't identical.

No, I don't mean he is condemning himself. Each of the propositions condemned is a reference to a specific historical incident, to understand exactly what was being condemned, one has to go back to the source document. The out of context nature of the Syllabus makes a lot of the 'errors' seem downright wacky.

Pius IX is the quintessential liberal who became conservative after being mugged by reality. His liberal period was from 1846-1848, his conservative period began in 1848 and continued to the end of his life. So yes, there was a radical shift in his thinking. Shortly after its publication, a French priest wrote a pamphlet explaining the syllabus which followed the citations to their source documents. So, for example, the condemnation of 'separation of Church and state' referred specifically to a series of anti-clerical laws that had recently been passed in Piedmont. Etc. All the propositions are like that, out of context, Pius sounds like a bit of a loony, in context, they are actually quite reasonable and restrained

THIS I understand completely; thank you and the good padre for helping to clarify. Long story short is that Pope Pius IX DID experience an epiphany of fundamental reasoning regarding the world around him.

"...mugged by reality." I gotta remember that phrase.

Well, yes, but that doesn't mean that the Syllabus is made up of quotations from earlier works by Pius IX that he'd once accepted and now denies. I mean, the first error condemned in the Syllabus is this:



This is not a quotation of something Pius IX once held, but now rejects!

Here's my attempt to explain its style.

Suppose you're making a "list of unconstitutional things" that includes a reference to where it says they're unconstitutional.

Then your list would look like:

Catholicism is forbidden (1st amendment)
All guns are banned (2nd amendment)
Women can't not vote (19th amendment)
Anyone can get elected president for 5 times (22nd amendment)


See?

You're saying he was not for them before he was against them?

Who are the others? I know only B16 and Scruton.

I don't know if this is what you have in mind, but this is a link to read all the encyclicals you can shake a stick at.

By the way, I have a copy of the Syllabus of Errors. I have a small collection of others, some kind of odd, but they appealed to my sense of curiosity the first time I wandered into the bookstore run by the Daughters of St. Paul in San Antonio. Sadly, this little shop got shuttered years ago. Worse, their web site is extremely unhelpful to acquire the little yellow pamphletones.

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9syll.htm

I've wandered into the Daughters of St. Paul bookshop in Charleston SC a few times.

You'd wander across the Styx if there was a bookstore over there.

Sounds like Too Much Time on My Hands to me.