This is now the third post on the blog related to the Feast of Christ the King; call this one a commemoration of the Second Vespers of this great feast. A quick examination of Pius XI’s Quas Primas will reveal, I think, why it is ever more important to commemorate this feast with the greatest care and attention. I say “care” because, as Pius XI himself remarks, they are the sumptuous and splendid feasts which elevate men’s hearts to the contemplation of heavenly realities, the attainment of virtue, and a knowledge of Christian doctrine. And I say “attention” because the political situation in the United States is a perfect example of the errors which Pius XI warned against in 1925.

In this post, I would like to comment upon several things which I noticed in Quas Primas as I reread it tonight. The first remark regards the role and importance of feasts in the Christian life. In Quas Primas #21, Pius XI wrote:

“For people are instructed in the truths of faith, and brought to appreciate the inner joys of religion far more effectually by the annual celebration of our sacred mysteries than by any official pronouncement of the teaching of the Church. Such pronouncements usually reach only a few and the more learned among the faithful; feasts reach them all; the former speak but once, the latter speak every year - in fact, forever. The Church’s teaching affects the mind primarily; her feasts affect both mind and heart, and have a salutary effect upon the whole of man’s nature. Man is composed of body and soul, and he needs these external festivities so that the sacred rites, in all their beauty and variety, may stimulate him to drink more deeply of the fountain of God’s teaching, that he may make it a part of himself, and use it with profit for his spiritual life….”

In recent years, some have lambasted the endless paper train which coming out of Rome: one lengthy, verbose document after another, all of which has ended in little practical effect. Perhaps the solution to this problem can be seen in Quas Primas #21. Documents can be wonderful and yet still fail to move the hearts of the faithful; the alternative are beautiful feasts which reach the whole Christian populace while moving the mind, heart, body and soul of man.

I think that John Paul II’s World Youth Days were an instance of the attempt to reach both soul and body. Unfortunately, the music and festivities seen at such youth gatherings tended to appeal more to the baser human instincts rather than to man’s appreciation for great beauty in media accesible to the eye and ear. Thus, I think, while these festivals reached the masses, they failed to move the masses beyond the natural level.

Indeed, some would say that this unfortunate failing is a characteristic of the Novus Ordo Missae in general: it appeals to man on a natural level, while failing to draw man to a higher level. We have been discussing this phenomenon, to some extent, here. In any case, Pius XI’s words are worth hearing: to catechize the Christian people in an effective way, the Church must employ all of the artistic genius at her disposal, and this art must be of the type calculated to appeal to the higher faculties of man.

Now Pius XI made the remark which I have been discussing, only by way of explanation for the meaning and import of a new feast in the Church’s liturgical year. But what doctrinal lessons was this feast designed to bring home? Pius XI explains:

“. . . the Empire of our Redeemer embraces all men. . . . Nor is there any difference in this matter between the individual and the family or the State; for all men, whether collectively or individually, are under the dominion of Christ. . . . If, therefore, the rulers of nations wish to preserve their authority, to promote and increase the prosperity of their countries, they will not neglect the public duty of reverence and obedience to the rule of Christ.”

How many are rushing to embrace these words here in the United States? Do we not prize the indifference of our government towards any and every religion? Yet Pius XI says, “while nations insult the beloved Name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their congresses and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim His kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm His rights.”

We may be “one nation under God”, but that is a statement which pleases the Freemasons very well. Americans, so I’ve read, have a fear of kingship: all the more would we fear a King who ruled over not only the laws of the State, but also within our very homes and hearts. Christ Jesus’ dominion is total and His power is absolute. He crushes our independence, demanding total submission to His will; when we have given everything we have to Him, we can only say: “We are bad servants, for we have only done our duty.”

Yet Catholics know how sweet and light is the yoke of Christ; they know that He is not a tyrant, but the King of love and the Prince of peace. To those who give themselves to Him here, He promises them a hundredfold in the world to come and blessings here besides. So Pius XI writes: “We firmly hope . . . that the feast of the Kingship of Christ . . . may hasten the return of society to our loving Savior. It would be the duty of Catholics to do all they can to bring about this happy result.”

Indeed, the duty of Catholics . . . but where are those Catholics today? It might be excusable if they pled the impossibility of the situation: “What can we do, after all, for the very Constitution of our civil government is indifferentist?” they might say. But often times, they do not say this, rather, they embrace the prinicple that civil government should be indifferent to Jesus Christ, the Lord of the Universe. In explicating the true notion of liberty, Leo XIII strongly condemns this principle of acquiesence:

“Justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action which would end in godlessness–namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them) alike, and to bestow upon the promiscuously equal rights and privileges. Since, then, the profession of one religion is necessary in the State, that religion must be professed which alone is true, and which can be recognized without difficulty . . . because the marks of truth are, as it were, engraven upon it. This religion, therefore, the rulers of the State must preserve and protect, if they would provide - as they should do - with prudence and usefulness for the good of the community” (Libertas Praestantissimum).

Whether there is anything to be done about our current situation, for example, here in the United States, I do not know. But we must reject, in the strongest terms, at least the acceptance in principle of a situation in which the government of the State is indifferent to Jesus Christ. Pius XI warns against going with the flow of indifferentism:

“This state of things may perhaps be attributed to a certain slowness and timidity in good people, who are reluctant to engage in conflict or oppose but a weak resistance; thus the enemies of the Church become bolder in their attacks. But if the faithful were generally to understand that it behooves them ever to fight courageously under the banner of Christ their King, then, fired with apostolic zeal, they would strive to win over to their Lord those hearts that are bitter and estranged from Him, and would valiantly defend His rights.”

I finish with the beautiful Post-communion prayer for the Mass of this Feast of Christ the King:

“Immortalitatis alimoniam consecuti, quaesumus, Domine: ut qui sub Christi Regis vexillis militare gloriamur, cum Ipso, in caelesti sede, iugiter regnare possimus.”

[my translation:]

“Having obtained the food of immortality, we pray thee, O Lord: that we who glory in waging war under the banners of Christ the King may be able to reign forever with Him in the house of heaven.”

go to main page