Count Joseph de Maistre
Happy Sunday! For many years, I’ve been familiar with the Papal Encyclicals that deal with the corrupt and anti-Christian ideas of the so called Enlightenment. The Popes of the 19th Century such as Gregory XVI, Pius IX and others condemned Enlightenment ideas such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and representative democracy.
Only recently have I been able to delve into the writings of the educated laity who fought against these dangerous ideas. They aren’t as popular because their ideas ultimately lost in the West but they’re vital because their ideas will be important to know for when the West collapses.
Those writers were part of a movement called the Counter-Enlightenment. The Counter-Enlightment thinker that is probably known to most people is Edmund Burke. He’s a great thinker to start out with when studying this movement. He wrote the well known book Reflections of the Revolution in France which is probably the best book to read for getting into Counter-Enlightenment literature. The book is not from a Catholic perspective but Catholics would agree with most of the arguments used. Also, It’s easily accessible. It’s available on Amazon and I even managed to find a copy in my local bookstore so it’s definitely an easy find.
After this book, any other Counter-Enlightenment thinkers can be read. The other big Counter-Enlightenment thinkers are Rene de Chateaubriand, Louis de Bonald, and Joseph de Maistre. Although others exist, those are the most common and are the ones to read after Burke. Recently, I’ve really been delving into the writings of Joseph de Maistre.
Maistre was a firm defender of traditional Christian teaching and opposed the Enlightenment. He was also against fake and shallow imposter religion that masqueraded as Christianity. In his letters on the Spanish Inquisition, he said the following about the Church of England:
Sensible of this and in order if possible, to stay the torrent, several writers and these too, members of the Established Church have proposed, by softening down certain Articles of its Creed to enlarge the pale of this Institution, so as to admit into it Christians of every denomination. This is, no doubt, an admirable expedient; and the persons who propose it reason, but consistently dogmas matter little. The Creed of the Anglican Church is reduced to a mere line; and that line is the first. Beyond this, everything is mere opinion and sentiment. Whence, it is my conviction that as a religious establishment or a spiritual power, the Church of England exists no longer. Two centuries have sufficed to reduce the trunk of the worm-eaten tree to dust. The bark alone remains because it is the interest of the civil power to preserve it.
In these letters, Maistre also exposes the lies of Church of England apologists who tell blatant falsehoods about the Spanish Inquisition while viciously oppressing Catholics in England and Ireland with Penal Laws which are far more brutal than the Inquisition ever was.
As I mentioned earlier, I’m only in the very early stages of studying this movement. I’ll need to study much more of it, but I must encourage others to research what I’m currently researching. Christians are beginning to find out the lies sold to us in High School about the enlightenment are just that, lies. A day will come when enlightenment values come to an end in the West. When this happens, many people will have to a choice. One of the options will be to restore Christendom. The more people who know the Counter-Enlightenment, the more people will choose Christendom and the Kingship of Christ.
This is one of the most important things when studying Christianity. After Church, prayer, Scripture study and Catechism study, this topic is the most important for a Christian to know. I would say that it’s even more important than studying hagiography or Marian apparitions. A lot of people will find that controversial but when they research this movement, they’ll know what I mean.
“…freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and representative democracy.”
These are all good things, although they are not without dangers. And they are dangers that we must be exposed to: Free Will is full of perils and that it the way it must be – so it has been ordained.
I must say again how much I enjoy reading your blog. The entries are very thought-provoking. That is powerful stuff you have quoted with reference to Maistre’s opinion of the Church of England – and so true (which is why my mother converted from Anglicanism to join my father and their children in Catholicism).
I admire your devotion to the faith and to learning. I hope to emulate it to some degree if I can, but I am no longer young and I don’t think I have the capacity let alone the time to do so profitably. If I might venture a warning though I would say that it can be very easy to get bogged down by all these old thinkers. In my view it is better to go back to basics and read the gospels, i.e. to treat the Gospel and the rest of the New Testament as meat and drink, and the all other works as sauces and relishes that are to be indulged in sparingly and only occasionally so as to enhance what is already there.
Hi Patrick,
Your warning is definitely appreciated. We only have a small amount of time in this world and we have to make the most of it. After all, none of us is promised tomorrow.
“In my view it is better to go back to basics and read the gospels, i.e. to treat the Gospel and the rest of the New Testament as meat and drink, and the all other works as sauces and relishes that are to be indulged in sparingly and only occasionally so as to enhance what is already there.”
That is very true. The basics are the most important. After all, I did say:
“After Church, prayer, Scripture study and Catechism study, this topic is the most important for a Christian to know.”
So it’s only the most important after several things. Going to Church is most important, then our prayer life, then our studying of Scripture and catechism.
I think the minimum that everyone should do is 15 minutes of prayer and 15 minutes of Scripture reading each day. I do at least that every day if not more. Fifteen minutes is good for 5 mysteries of the rosary. Fifteen minutes of Scripture reading is enough for a few chapters in each testament(I try to do both every day).
I understand that a lot of people can’t give more than this. However, maybe the next time you’re looking at reading a new bestseller or the new Dan Brown book, maybe substitute that for Burke’s book.
God bless you Patrick.
I really don’t think Paul Williams would be a Catholic if you taught him the “correct” history and exposed him to the “Extraordinary Form”. We’re not going to stop doing our rakats because of that.
Some Catholics thinks that hagiography is extremely important because the saints are also human beings who by the grace of God had attained the beatific vision and experience similar struggles that we do. That offers of form of encouragement because we can sympathize with them, and they provide an attainment example of achieving salvation as opposed to presenting an impossible standard. (Interestingly, most canonized saints, with the exception of some martyrs are members of a religious order.) While they are understood to be in the presence of God, they were once part of the “Church Suffering”. I think that would be more relatable to most parishioners than upholding historical anti-liberal Church positions.
I believe that the Church possesses no deposit of faith, and it is just an earthly institution invested in political influence and power. You could like some of the liturgical practices of Catholicism, but if you want some the high liturgy with a more contemporary stance on social positions, be an Episcopal or Anglican.
https://bloggingtheology.net/2017/11/26/the-perfect-definition-of-the-episcopal-church/
If one simply does not like the political and intellectual tradition of the Church, then one would not be comfortable as a Catholic. The Church is the Vatican and the positions that it has adopted. The Catholic Church cannot be separated from the Vatican. The Church is therefore a mere earthly institution.
I also love Hume too much. The Catholic Church hated that Scotsman. Hume at least defended traditional marriage in some respects: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2011/04/2956/. Hume also criticizes polygamy. I generally am not going to expend much effort to defend it as a contemporary social practice, but someone woman Muslim said that polygamy was practiced in Islam because so many wives were widowed after wars, and the survivors could take care of the widowed by marrying them (and they should be treated equally with the man’s other wife).
Hello again Latias,
I’ll reply to that which is relevant to my post.
“Some Catholics thinks that hagiography is extremely important because the saints are also human beings who by the grace of God had attained the beatific vision and experience similar struggles that we do. That offers of form of encouragement because we can sympathize with them, and they provide an attainment example of achieving salvation as opposed to presenting an impossible standard. (Interestingly, most canonized saints, with the exception of some martyrs are members of a religious order.) While they are understood to be in the presence of God, they were once part of the “Church Suffering”. ”
I agree 100%. I think hagiography is super important. Where did I say in the post that it wasn’t important?
“I think that would be more relatable to most parishioners than upholding historical anti-liberal Church positions.”
That’s your opinion. I think they’re both extremely important. Keep in mind, Saints in the last 200 years in the West harshly opposed liberalism. St. John Vianney and St. Pius X for example. They often go hand in hand.
“I believe that the Church possesses no deposit of faith, and it is just an earthly institution invested in political influence and power.”
Well, you’re a Muslim. If you believed it was based on a deposit of faith you’d be a Catholic. However, as a Muslim, you believe that Jesus originally had a group of followers with theology that was 100% Islamic. I simply believe in the promise of Matthew 16 that the gates of hades won’t prevail against the Church.
“if you want some the high liturgy with a more contemporary stance on social positions, be an Episcopal or Anglican.”
You’re correct but I don’t want a “more contemporary stance on social positions”.
“If one simply does not like the political and intellectual tradition of the Church, then one would not be comfortable as a Catholic. The Church is the Vatican and the positions that it has adopted. The Catholic Church cannot be separated from the Vatican. The Church is therefore a mere earthly institution. ”
Of course it’s an earthly institution. That is why the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on Earth. The last two words are important to understanding this.
I’m not a fan of the Enlightenment so am therefore not a fan of Hume. I have read quite a bit of Voltaire though. I must say, the enlightenment figures were far smarter than contemporary leftists who claim to have inherited the Enlightenment tradition.