Label

Label (pronounced ley-buhl)

(1) A slip of paper, cloth, or other material, marked or inscribed, for attachment to something to indicate its manufacturer, nature, ownership, destination etc.

(2) A short word or phrase descriptive of a person, group, intellectual movement etc.

(3) A word or phrase indicating that what follows belongs in a particular category or classification.

(4) In architecture, a molding or dripstone over a door or window, especially one that extends horizontally across the top of the opening and vertically downward for a certain distance at the sides.  Now variously called a dripstone, label mold or hood mold.

(5) A brand or trademark, especially used by those who distribute fashion items or recorded music.

(6) In heraldry, a narrow horizontal strip with a number of downward extensions of rectangular or dovetail form, usually placed in chief as the cadency mark of an eldest son.

(7) A strip or narrow piece of anything (obsolete).

(8) In chemistry, to incorporate a radioactive or heavy isotope into (a molecule) in order to make traceable.

(9) In computing, a group of characters, such as a number or a word, appended to a particular statement in a program to allow its unique identification.

(10) In English common law, an alternative name for codicil, meaning to amend or append (both now at least obscure, probably obsolete).

1275-1325: From the Middle English label (narrow band, strip of cloth), from the Old English læppa (skirt, flap of a garment), from the Old French label, lambel & lambel (ribbon, strip of cloth, fringe worn on clothes), from the Old Frankish labba (torn piece of cloth), from the Proto-Germanic lappǭ & lappô (cloth stuff, rag, scraps, flap, dewlap, lobe, rabbit ear) from the primitive Indo-European leb (blade).  The word became lambeau (strip, rag, shred, tatter) in Modern French and etymologists suggest there was (with a diminutive suffix) influence from the Frankish labba or some other Germanic source (such as the Old High German lappa (flap), from the Proto-Germanic lapp- (used to form words for loose cloth etc).

The oldest use was the technical term in heraldry ((6) above).  By the late fifteenth century, use had extended to dangling strips of cloth which would now be called ribbons, used as an ornament in dress or the strip attached to a document to hold a seal.  The modern meaning "tag, sticker, slip of paper" dates from the 1670s; the figurative sense of "to categorize" from 1853.  As used to describe the circular paper glued to the center of gramophone records, use began in 1907, less than for years after mass-production began and the record companies came to be known as “record labels” after 1947.  As a verb in the sense of "to affix a label to", use date from circa 1600 ahile the figurative sense of "to categorize" is from 1853 when used in the novel discipline of sociology.  The related forms are labeled, labeling (or labelling) & labelled.

Labelling Theory

A sociological theory of symbolic interactionism, labelling theory’s origins can be traced to the later work of Émile Durkheim, a seminal figure in the discipline.  It suggests attaching a label to someone influences them to behave in conformity with the label.  Sociologists prefer to write with big words and double negatives but one did offer a simplified description of the theory as “…a specific instance of phenomenology.  The theory hypothesizes that if labels are applied to people, especially stigmatizing labels which encapsulate a societal disapprobation of deviation from the construct of the acceptable, this will tend to promote deviant behavior, becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.”  By sociology’s standards of constructed complexity, that was good because it could be understood unlike some of the dense, difficult stuff in the journals although, with the dumbing-down of higher education in the late twentieth century, it became increasingly a discussion among academics.

Not surprisingly, the early work attracted the attention of criminologists who concentrated on the implications of labelling inducing behavior which conformed to the label although, there was nothing in the theory, once deconstructed, which precluded labelling compelling behavior with which an individual could attempt to disprove the label.  For the behavioralists, either was a type of linguistic determinism; it mattered not the direction in which behavior changed.  Few theories in the social sciences have been so criticized on the basis of the perception of structural bias and, given the obvious limitations imposed on any research, it must be acknowledged labelling theory may appear to be inseparable from a political agenda.  Despite the criticisms, labelling theory did contribute to critiques of the treatment of minorities and the way power-elites used constructs of deviance as one of the means with which assert social and economic control.

Sociology seemed a good idea at the time, left to right:  Auguste Comte (1798-1857), Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) and Max Weber (1864-1920).

1927 Bentley 3-Litre (speed model) Red label Sports Roadster (chassis # TN1559).  

Bentley (then a separate operation from Rolls-Royce) produced the 3 Litre model between 1921-1929.  Although there was the odd one-off, the factory offered the 3 Litre in three variants (1) the Blue label which was the standard touring car available in short (SWB, 117.5 in (2,984 mm) add long (130.0 in (3,302 mm)) wheelbase (LWB) forms, the latter introduced in 1923, (2) the more powerful SWB Red label (speed model) made between 1924-1929 and (3), the rare, highly tuned Green label, production of which ran in parallel with the Red label and was offered only on a 108 in (2,743 mm) wheelbase chassis with a factory guarantee that 100 mph (161 km/h) was attainable.  Bentley has on occasion since used the color label scheme for model differentiation.

Johnny Walker formalized their red & black (more have since been added) labels in 1909 although the company had been selling its blends since 1865 with white (soon discontinued) and later red and black labels although the official names were Old Highland Whisky (with a white label), Special Old Highland Whisky (with a red label) and Extra Special Old Highland Whisky (with a black label).  It was reports from retailers that customers seldom used the product name and asked for “the one with the black label” or “the one with the red label” which convinced the distillery to re-label.

Mercedes-Maybach Study, Tokyo Motor Show, 1997, the design concept for what became the doomed Maybach.  Had it been sold as a top-of-the-line Mercedes-Benz it was, it might have been a success.

The concept of "designer label" is very old and evidence of the concept predates antiquity but the connotations of the word "label" as something exclusive or highly priced has probably been understood in its broad commercial sense only since the mid-nineteenth century.  In the narrow technical sense all brands can be considered labels but low-priced, mass-market commodities are rarely considered labels in that particular sense of the word.  There is the odd brand which successfully straddles entire cost spectrums and one used to be Mercedes-Benz, the label applied to everything from diesel taxis, trucks small and large, sports cars, grand prix machines and limousines.  It was a rare example of a prestigious label which didn't have its reputation tarnished by an association with lower priced products and for decades this was understood by the engineers who ran things.  Unfortunately, in the 1990s the company fell into the hands of salesmen, MBAs and such types who, skilled in the marketing of soft drinks and washing power, decided what was needed was a more prestigious brand to sit above Mercedes-Benz.  That was what Toyota did when it created Lexus and there it made sense but for Mercedes-Benz it made no sense at all to suggest that the brand which had been good enough for royalty, popes, dictators and major figures in organized crime was just not sufficiently prestigious.  Using the Maybach name was about as dopy as the concept given few people alive knew the brand nor its hardly illustrious history.  As a machine, the Maybach was a good piece of engineering and though visually undistinguished, the designers really can't be blamed; wind tunnels are dictatorial.  As a label vis-à-vis Mercedes-Benz however, it represented a misunderstanding of the market by those who purported to be experts in such things.  Mercedes-Benz is still recovering from the damage done by the MBAs.

Lindsay Lohan in sweater with her own visage emblazoned in sequins, created by UK fashion label Ashish, London 2014.

Etiquette

Etiquette (pronounced et-i-kit or et-i-ket)

(1) A construct both culturally specific and culturally variable which is a codification of the requirements as to social behavior; proprieties of conduct as established in any class or community or for any occasion (and thus often exists as sub-sets which can in detail be contradictory).

(2) A prescribed or accepted code of usage in matters of procedure, ceremonies etc in any formal environment (courts, investitures etc).

(3) An accepted (and sometimes in whole or in part codified) set of rules of ethical behavior relating to professional practice or the conduct between members of the profession.

(4) The expected behavior in certain situations (surfing; golf etc) and enforced according to prevailing standards.

(5) A label used to indicate a letter is to be sent by airmail (the French par avion (by airplane).

1730–1740: From the French étiquette (property, a little piece of paper, or a mark or title, affixed to a bag or bundle, expressing its contents, a label, ticket; a memorandum), from the Middle French estiquette (ticket, label, memorandum), from the Old French verbs estechier, estichier, estequier estiquier & estiquer (to attach, stick), from the Frankish stekan, stikkan & stikjan (to stick, pierce, sting), from the Proto-Germanic stikaną, stikōną & staikijaną (to be sharp, pierce, prick), from the primitive Indo-European steyg or teyg- (to be sharp, to stab).  It was akin to the Old High German stehhan (to stick, attach, nail) (which endures in Modern German as stechen (to stick)) and the Old English stician (to pierce, stab, be fastened).  Etiquette is a noun and etiquettal is an adjective; the noun plural is etiquettes.

The most attractive story of the origin of etiquette in its modern form is that the groundskeepers tending the gardens & parks at the Palace of Versailles became annoyed at the casual way the courtiers attached to the household of Louis XIV (1638–1715; le Roi Soleil (the Sun King), King of France 1643-1715) would walk across their lovingly manicured lawns.  In response the gardeners would erect stakes onto which they would pin étiquettes (literally “little cards”) warning transgressors to “Keep off the Grass”.  Unfortunately, although there’s no doubt the signs did exist at Versailles and the legend is even Louis XIV dutifully complied, they were not the origin of “etiquette” in its modern sense.

The reverence for lawns however outlasted the Ancien Régime, Napoleon, the Congress of Vienna, the revolutions of the nineteenth century, wars, occupations and five republics and Nicolas Sarközy (b 1955; President of France 2007-2012).  On visits to Paris, tourists who have since high school neglected their French sometimes see the signs Pelouse au repos in parks which they translate as “place to rest”, only to be harangued by an angry attendant, pointing and ordering them back to the pavement.  The actual translation is “the lawn is resting” and any other country would include “Keep off the Grass” in English (the world’s lingua franca) but that’s not the French way.  In the hierarchy of Gaelic officialdom, the part inspectors are said to be worse than the parking police but not as bad as the stewards patrolling the spectator areas at the annual Le Mans 24 hour endurance race, their officiousness something to behold as gleefully they enjoy being cloaked in their brief authority.

The exact history remains murky but etymologists seem most convinced the word in its modern sense can be traced to the seventeenth century Spanish royal court which, impressed by the ritualized forms of the Hapsburg monarchy in Vienna, had officials record a list of the rules and procedures covering dress, orders of procedure in ceremonies, forms of dress and so on.  There were printed on cards distributed to functionaries and others so they would know what to do and when.  From this, the Spanish court became one of Europe’s better behaved royal operations and from the French etiquette (label, ticket etc), the Spanish form was etiqueta.  Simultaneously, many army barracks had such labels nailed to the walls (France étiquettes, In Spain etiquetas, in Italy etichette) containing the relevant instructions for the soldiers.  However, it’s thought the use in the royal court was the most influential and from this evolved the concept of etiquette which has developed into a list of the rules or formalities signifying the socially accepted rules of behavior and decorum.  Not all agree with the Spaniards getting the credit and some trace it back to well before Louis XIV but all seem to agree it was one royal court or another.

There has for centuries been an industry in publishing “etiquette guides” (the first seem to have appeared in sixteenth century Italy) and that many have been issued with titles such as “Modern Etiquette” or “American Etiquette” which does suggest what is regarded as acceptable is subject to change although the very notion of etiquette is highly nuanced; what is acceptable in one context can be social death in another.  Nor is necessary even to purchase a book because the internet is awash with guides on the matter but as an indication that both formats may just be scratching the surface, there are finishing schools in Switzerland which offer six-week courses for US$34,000.  Presumably essential for daughters being prepared for husband hunting, the six-week duration does hint there’s more to it than mastering the use of the flatware arrayed at dinner and knowing whether it’s a properly a napkin or serviette.  Even more essential that learning those details, what such courses can impart is the essential skill to be able to identify those who are and are not “one of us”; group identity as important to the rich as it is to supporters of football clubs.

Surely only a matter of time.

The model of eitquette has been used to coin a few amusing forms including netiquette (the construct being (inter)net + et(iquette)) which was documented as early as 1993 (the dawn of the world wide web) and referred to the “appropriate style and manners to be used when communicating on the internet).  Some of this early (often doomed) attempt to imposed civility on digital communication survives including the warning that the use of capital letters conveys SHOUTING.  Chatiquette is a similar set of rules, specific to chatrooms.  Jetiquette lists the standards of acceptable behavior expected of passengers travelling on a commercial airline) (arm-rest ownership, the politics of the reclining seat, the matter of socks and bare feet and all that).  Hatiquette defines the etiquette attached to the wearing of hats and it’s a complex business because what’s obligatory in one place is a sin against fashion in another.  It goes back a long way: After the passing of the UK’s Reform Act (1832) which extended the franchise, permitting the entry to parliament by lower reaches of the middle class, the Duke of Wellington (1769-1852) cast his eye on the benches of the House of Commons and pronounced he’d “never seen such bad hats”.  Reddiquette describes the proper conduct to be followed on the website Reddit and it takes not long to work out not all redditors comply, any more than they take seriously the moderators’ rules on their sub-reddits.  In the narrow technical sense Wikiquette is the etiquette dictating how one should behave when working on a wiki (a type of database; there are many Wikis) but it’s used almost exclusively of Wikipedia, the open access online encyclopaedia.  Debtiquette sets out the rules of debt and deals both with owing something and being owed; it seems more to be about non-financial debts, the rules for which are fairly well defined in law. 

Syllabus

Syllabus (pronounce sil-a-bis)

(1) In the Roman Catholic Church, a formally issued list.

(2) In education, a summary of topics which will be covered during an academic course, or a text or lecture.

(3) In law reports, the headnote of a reported case containing a summary of the the points of law determined, prefixed to a reported case.

1650s: From the Medieval Latin syllabus (list) which actually arose as a misprint, its accusative plural syllabos appearing in place of sittybas (or perhaps sittubas, either spelling meaning “parchment label” or “table of contents”) in an edition of Ad Atticum (Letters to Atticus by the Roman statesman & scholar Cicero (106-43 BC)), printed during the 1470s.  The corrupt form was influenced by the stem of the Ancient Greek συλλαμβάνω (sullambánō) (put together), source of σῠλλᾰβή (sullabḗ) (syllable); the true etymon is σιττύβα (sittúba) (parchment label; table of contents”) of unknown origin.  As was not unknown with medieval errors of transcription, the name stuck and it too came to mean "a label for a papyrus roll" before morphing into its current usual meaning (an outline or other brief statement of the main points of a discourse, the subjects of a course of lectures, the contents of a curriculum), a shift established by the mid seventeenth century.  Had it been a real word, the proper plural would have been syllabi, now in English accepted as an alternative plural form.  Syllabus is a noun; the noun plural is syllabi or syllabuses.

Mean Girls (2004) Mall Rats moment: Now on the syllabus.

Since the 1980s, there has been criticism of some of the more novel courses which have appeared on University syllabuses.  While there has always been something of a hierarchy in the perception of the intellectual robustness demanded by various courses (physics, engineering and such higher on most pecking orders than social work, media studies, gender studies etc) such has been the emergence of what’s regarded as academic promiscuity (some say prefer prostitution) that the term “Mickey Mouse courses” was coined to describe some of the newest entries.  The use of “Mickey Mouse” as a pejorative is an example of dysphemism (an expression with connotations derogatory either about the subject matter or to the audience) and was from the French dysphémisme, modelled on euphémisme (euphemism), modified by the substitution of the prefix dys-, from the Ancient Greek δυσ- (dus-) (expressing the idea of difficulty, or bad status).  Interestingly, in Australia, “Mickey Mouse” was also used as a slang form meaning “very good”, apparently as a form of rhyming slang (“Jack Lang in the local parlance”) based on “full house”, a most desirable hand in poker.  The use operated as late as the 1960s in parallel with “Mickey Mouse” meaning “poor quality” attributed to the cheap, unreliable (and fake) Mickey Mouse watches which were sold in great quantity during World War II (1939-1945).

In some cases, the criticism is probably unfair because university economics departments coining the term “Swiftonomics” to describe the micro-economic effect on regional economies of Taylor Swift’s (b 1989) tour seems something most suitable for students to study.  It would be the ideal template as a case study; not only does her tour have a beginning, a middle and an end but it would offer something onto which could be mapped most of the tools of social and economic analysis including the dreaded econometrics which most of us regard as having “a marginal propensity to confuse”.  Boston’s Northeastern University is taking Swiftonomics most seriously.  At least the reaction to the announcement of Swiftonomics wasn’t as cruel as a course in the sociological importance of football being dismissed as “David Beckham studies” and something designed to attract enrolments from paying students rather than a “real” course of study.

Mean Girls has appeared on a number of syllabuses and objectively, there’s no reason why the same tools of deconstruction and analysis used of any of the texts more traditionally part of university course shouldn’t be used and Mean Girls content has been noted in fields such as media studies, cultural studies, gender studies and film studies.  In 2015, Colorado College attracted attention for offered a Mean Girls themed class in which 13 students could gain credits for exploring the "motives behind why women seek authority and the actions they are willing to take in order to hold onto it."  Once can see why the department choose Mean Girls to dissect that sort of realpolitik and the course included structural comparisons with tales from Greek mythology.  Those who are snobby about the so-called “Mickey Mouse” courses on syllabuses and blame it on a decline in standards should recall astrology and alchemy once appeared on the degree rolls of many respectable institutions.

Pius IX, modernity and the Syllabus of Errors

Thou shalt not: Pope Pius IX

The most famous syllabus to emerge from the Vatican was that issued by Pope Pius IX (Giovanni Maria Mastai Ferretti, 1792–1878; pope 1846-1878) in 1864 as Syllabus Errorum (Syllabus of Errors), a usefully comprehensive list of the faults of modernity in which His Holiness listed eighty propositions he condemned as erroneous.  For a modern audience, the syllabus is at its most useful when Pius discusses the cult of Freemasonry and the “frauds and machinations” of this “scourge, winding through sinuous caverns, deceiving many with astute frauds.”  Calling them a “wicked” group from the “synagogue of Satan” and a “throng of propagandists”, he called upon the righteous “…to make every effort to defend the faithful which are entrusted to you against the insidious contagion of these sects and to save from perdition those who unfortunately have inscribed themselves in such sects.”  Though controversial, even today, it is by, the standards of the Holy See, a pleasingly brief document and defines a coherent world-view in a few pages; some subsequent pronouncements from Rome have been more verbose and said less.  The pontificate of Pius IX remains the longest in history.  Since the election of Pope Francis (b 1936; pope since 2013), Pius IX has attracted a new audience of admirers, in the curia and beyond.  This is at least in part because of the certainty of his positions and the unambiguity in his words.  His most memorable quotes are succinct:

Liberal Catholics are the worst enemies of the Church.  If a future Pope teaches anything contrary to the Catholic Faith, do not follow him.

However, there can be consequences for those who decide not to follow a pope thought to be teaching things “contrary to the Catholic faith”.  In November 2023, it was announced Pope Francis had sacked (“removed from the pastoral care of the diocese” as the Holy See puts such things) US Bishop Joseph Strickland (b 1958; Bishop of the Diocese of Tyler, Texas 2012-2023) and appointed an interim apostolic administrator.  Whether related or not, the announcement was made only a couple of days after the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (the DDF, the latest name for the Inquisition) issued a statement confirming an adult who identifies as transgender can receive the sacrament of Baptism under the same conditions as any adult, as long as “there is no risk of causing scandal or confusion to other Catholics”.  To clarify the matter, the DDF added that children or adolescents experiencing transgender identity issues may also receive Baptism “if well prepared and willing”.  This remarkable statement was one of several answers to sacrament-based questions relating to those who identify as transgender or are in same-sex relationships which were generated in response to questions to the DDF posed in July 2023 by Bishop José Negri (b 1959; Bishop of Santo Amaro, Sao Paulo, Brazil since 2015).  All such statements from the Vatican (especially those which in any way touch on LGBTQQIAAOP issues) must be assessed as part of the pope’s response to the recent sessions of the Synod on Synodality and of great interest was the response about whether transgender-identifying people or those in homosexual relationships (1) can be godparents or (2) witness a marriage and (3) whether children adopted or born through assisted reproduction to same-sex couples can be baptised.  To that last matter the DDF quoted the relevant section of the Code of Canon law, saying “For the child to be baptised there must be a well-founded hope that he or she will be educated in the Catholic religion”.  Lambeth Palace would have been proud of a fudge like that but it anyway means transgender-identifying people can be baptized and witness marriages.

Bishop Strickland (appointed to his position in 2012 by Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022)) is said to be one of the WWJD (what would Jesus do?) school and on 12 May 2023 had tweeted (ie to the whole world) “I believe Pope Francis is the pope, but it is time for me to say that I reject his program of undermining the Deposit of Faith.  Follow Jesus."  It would have been a nice touch had he’d added “Follow Pius IX” but he resisted that temptation.  The tweet was enough for the Vatican to launch an investigation, in response to which on more than one occasion Bishop Strickland asserted he would not voluntarily resign.  The investigation was remarkably quick by the standards of the Holy See and early in November a spokesman for the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston revealed the tribunal had advised His Holiness “the continuation in office of Bishop Strickland was not feasible.”  The pope requested the bishop resign but he declined, thus the rare sacking.

In many ways, it’s not the sacking (though rare) which is remarkable but that it took so long to happen.  Strickland had long argued the Roman Catholic Church has become “weak” under Francis and openly challenged the pope to dismiss him, something which observers of the Vatican suspect might have happened some time ago had not Benedict lived as long as he did.  Just to make sure however, shortly after Benedict was entombed, Strickland re-tweeted a video which condemned Francis as a “diabolically disoriented clown” but despite that, he was quoted as blaming the dismissal on his refusal to implement one of Francis’ progressive reforms restricting the old Latin Mass.  An issue which quietly has been simmering since Second Vatican Council (Vatican II; 1962-1965 (which Strickland probably regards as heretical)) Strickland insisted the Latin rituals must remain “because I can’t starve out part of my flock", adding, “I feel very much at peace in the Lord and the truth that he died for.”

Nor is Strickland without support because early in his pontificate, some theologians and cardinals went dangerously close to accusing Francis of being a heretic and after the sacking, perhaps sniffing blood, the editor of The Remnant (a most traditional Catholic newspaper) took to X (formerly known as Twitter) called the firing “total war”, adding “Francis is a clear and present danger not only to Catholics the world over but also to the whole world itself."   No doubt he agreed with Strickland who tweeted: “Rejoice always that…no matter what the day brings Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life, yesterday, today and forever. May the saints and the Blessed Virgin Mary always inspire us to return to Christ no matter how we may wander into darkness. Jesus is Light from Light."  That is a WWJD motif: “Where there is darkness, Jesus will make the light”.

Francis has certainly become more assertive since the death of Benedict, condemning the “backwardness” of some conservative Catholic leaders (notably in Germany and the US), saying what they believed in was “not faith but political ideology” and that Church doctrine on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage can change.  Changing something with two thousand-odd years of inertia and institutional memory won’t be easy but Francis has the priceless advantage enjoyed by probably no other head of government or state currently in office: he sits atop a theocracy as an absolute sovereign, whatever he says, goes; he has the last word.  Interestingly, whenever some matter is clearly contentious, he does increasingly mention the word “doctrine”, conscious no doubt that he and everybody else knows that if he chooses to speak ex cathedra, that invokes papal infallibility and means not only is his ruling final but that objections may no longer be even discussed.  Defined dogmatically under Pius IX at the First Vatican Council (Vatican I; 1869–1870 (although it was then claimed it had actually existed and been acknowledged for over a thousand years), no pope has spoken ex cathedra since Pius XII (1876-1958; pope 1939-1958) in 1950 but for Francis it remains his thermo-nuclear option.

The Syllaus of Errors, Pope Pius IX, 1864

I. PANTHEISM, NATURALISM AND ABSOLUTE RATIONALISM

1. There exists no Supreme, all-wise, all-provident Divine Being, distinct from the universe, and God is identical with the nature of things, and is, therefore, subject to changes. In effect, God is produced in man and in the world, and all things are God and have the very substance of God, and God is one and the same thing with the world, and, therefore, spirit with matter, necessity with liberty, good with evil, justice with injustice. (Allocution "Maxima quidem", 9 June, 1862)

2. All action of God upon man and the world is to be denied. (Ibid)

3. Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil; it is law to itself, and suffices, by its natural force, to secure the welfare of men and of nations. (Ibid)

4. All the truths of religion proceed from the innate strength of human reason; hence reason is the ultimate standard by which man can and ought to arrive at the knowledge of all truths of every kind. (Ibid and Encyclical "Qui pluribus", 9 November, 1846, etc)

5. Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason. (Ibid)

6. The faith of Christ is in opposition to human reason and divine revelation not only is not useful, but is even hurtful to the perfection of man. (Ibid)

7. The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth.

II. MODERATE RATIONALISM

8. As human reason is placed on a level with religion itself, so theological must be treated in the same manner as philosophical sciences.  (Allocution "Singulari quadam", 9 December, 1854)

9. All the dogmas of the Christian religion are indiscriminately the object of natural science or philosophy, and human reason, enlightened solely in an historical way, is able, by its own natural strength and principles, to attain to the true science of even the most abstruse dogmas; provided only that such dogmas be proposed to reason itself as its object. (Letters to the Archbishop of Munich, "Gravissimas inter," Dec. 11, 1862, and "Tuas libenter", 21 December, 1863)

10. As the philosopher is one thing, and philosophy another, so it is the right and duty of the philosopher to subject himself to the authority which he shall have proved to be true; but philosophy neither can nor ought to submit to any such authority. (Ibid,  11 December, 1862)

11. The Church not only ought never to pass judgment on philosophy, but ought to tolerate the errors of philosophy, leaving it to correct itself. (Ibid, 21 December, 1863)

12. The decrees of the Apostolic See and of the Roman congregations impede the true progress of science.  (Ibid)

13. The method and principles by which the old scholastic doctors cultivated theology are no longer suitable to the demands of our times and to the progress of the sciences. (Ibid)

14. Philosophy is to be treated without taking any account of supernatural revelation.  (Ibid)

III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITUDINARIANISM

15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true.  (Allocution "Maxima quidem", 9 June. 1862; Damnatio "Multiplices inter", 10 June, 1851)

16. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation.  (Encyclical "Qui pluribus", 9 November, 1846)

17. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ.  (Encyclical "Quanto conficiamur", 10 August, 1863, etc)

18. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church.  (Encyclical "Noscitis", 8 December, 1849)

IV. SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, SECRET SOCIETIES, BIBLICAL SOCIETIES, CLERICO-LIBERAL SOCIETIES

Pests of this kind are frequently reprobated in the severest terms in the Encyclical "Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846, Allocution "Quibus quantisque," April 20, 1849, Encyclical "Noscitis et nobiscum," Dec. 8, 1849, Allocution "Singulari quadam," Dec. 9, 1854, Encyclical "Quanto conficiamur," Aug. 10, 1863.

V. ERRORS CONCERNING THE CHURCH AND HER RIGHTS

19. The Church is not a true and perfect society, entirely free- nor is she endowed with proper and perpetual rights of her own, conferred upon her by her Divine Founder; but it appertains to the civil power to define what are the rights of the Church, and the limits within which she may exercise those rights.  (Allocution "Singulari quadam, & quuot"; 9 December, 1854, etc)

20. The ecclesiastical power ought not to exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government. (Allocution "Meminit unusquisque", 30 September, 1861)

21. The Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion. (Damnatio "Multiplices inter", 10 June, 1851)

22. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and authors are strictly bound is confined to those things only which are proposed to universal belief as dogmas of faith by the infallible judgment of the Church.  (Letter to the Archbishop of Munich, "Tuas libenter", 21 December, 1863)

23. Roman pontiffs and ecumenical councils have wandered outside the limits of their powers, have usurped the rights of princes, and have even erred in defining matters of faith and morals.  (Damnatio "Multiplices inter", 10 June, 1851)

24. The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect.  (Apostolic Letter "Ad Apostolicae", 22 August, 1851)

25. Besides the power inherent in the episcopate, other temporal power has been attributed to it by the civil authority granted either explicitly or tacitly, which on that account is revocable by the civil authority whenever it thinks fit.  (Ibid)

26. The Church has no innate and legitimate right of acquiring and possessing property. (Allocution "Nunquam fore", 15 December, 1856; Encyclical "Incredibili", 7 September, 1863)

27. The sacred ministers of the Church and the Roman pontiff are to be absolutely excluded from every charge and dominion over temporal affairs.  (Allocution "Maxima quidem", 9 June, 1862)

28. It is not lawful for bishops to publish even letters Apostolic without the permission of Government.  (Allocution "Nunquam fore". 15 December, 1856)

29. Favours granted by the Roman pontiff ought to be considered null, unless they have been sought for through the civil government.  (Ibid)

30. The immunity of the Church and of ecclesiastical persons derived its origin from civil law.  (Damnatio "Multiplices inter", 10 June, 1851)

31. The ecclesiastical forum or tribunal for the temporal causes, whether civil or criminal, of clerics, ought by all means to be abolished, even without consulting and against the protest of the Holy See.  (Allocution "Nunquam fore", 15 December, 1856; Allocution "Acerbissimum", 27 September, 1852)

32. The personal immunity by which clerics are exonerated from military conscription and service in the army may be abolished without violation either of natural right or equity. Its abolition is called for by civil progress, especially in a society framed on the model of a liberal government.  (Letter to the Bishop of Monreale "Singularis nobisque", 29 September, 1864)

33. It does not appertain exclusively to the power of ecclesiastical jurisdiction by right, proper and innate, to direct the teaching of theological questions.  (Letter to the Archbishop of Munich, "Tuas libenter", 21 December, 1863)

34. The teaching of those who compare the Sovereign Pontiff to a prince, free and acting in the universal Church, is a doctrine which prevailed in the Middle Ages.  (Apostolic Letter "Ad Apostolicae", 22 August, 1851)

35. There is nothing to prevent the decree of a general council, or the act of all peoples, from transferring the supreme pontificate from the bishop and city of Rome to another bishop and another city. (Ibid)

36. The definition of a national council does not admit of any subsequent discussion, and the civil authority car assume this principle as the basis of its acts.  (Ibid)

37. National churches, withdrawn from the authority of the Roman pontiff and altogether separated, can be established.  (Allocution "Multis gravibusque", 17 December, 1860)

38. The Roman pontiffs have, by their too arbitrary conduct, contributed to the division of the Church into Eastern and Western.  (Apostolic Letter "Ad Apostolicae", 22 August, 1851)

VI. ERRORS ABOUT CIVIL SOCIETY, CONSIDERED BOTH IN ITSELF AND IN ITS RELATION TO THE CHURCH

39. The State, as being the origin and source of all rights, is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits. (Allocution "Maxima quidem", 9 June, 1862)

40. The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well- being and interests of society. (Encyclical "Qui pluribus", 9 November, 1846; Allocution "Quibus quantisque", 20 April, 1849)

41. The civil government, even when in the hands of an infidel sovereign, has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs. It therefore possesses not only the right called that of "exsequatur," but also that of appeal, called "appellatio ab abusu."  (Apostolic Letter "Ad Apostolicae", 22 August, 1851)

42. In the case of conflicting laws enacted by the two powers, the civil law prevails. (Ibid)

43. The secular Dower has authority to rescind, declare and render null, solemn conventions, commonly called concordats, entered into with the Apostolic See, regarding the use of rights appertaining to ecclesiastical immunity, without the consent of the Apostolic See, and even in spite of its protest. (Allocution "Multis gravibusque", 17 December, 1860; Allocution "In consistoriali", 1 November, 1850)

44. The civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government: hence, it can pass judgment on the instructions issued for the guidance of consciences, conformably with their mission, by the pastors of the Church. Further, it has the right to make enactments regarding the administration of the divine sacraments, and the dispositions necessary for receiving them.  (Allocutions "In consistoriali", 1 November, 1850, and "Maxima quidem", 9 June, 1862)

45. The entire government of public schools in which the youth- of a Christian state is educated, except (to a certain extent) in the case of episcopal seminaries, may and ought to appertain to the civil power, and belong to it so far that no other authority whatsoever shall be recognized as having any right to interfere in the discipline of the schools, the arrangement of the studies, the conferring of degrees, in the choice or approval of the teachers. (Allocutions "Quibus luctuosissimmis", 5 September, 1851, and "In consistoriali", 1 November, 1850)

46. Moreover, even in ecclesiastical seminaries, the method of studies to be adopted is subject to the civil authority. (Allocution "Nunquam fore", 15 December, 1856)

47. The best theory of civil society requires that popular schools open to children of every class of the people, and, generally, all public institutes intended for instruction in letters and philosophical sciences and for carrying on the education of youth, should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority, control and interference, and should be fully subjected to the civil and political power at the pleasure of the rulers, and according to the standard of the prevalent opinions of the age. (Epistle to the Archbishop of Freiburg, "Cum non sine", 14 July, 1864)

48. Catholics may approve of the system of educating youth unconnected with Catholic faith and the power of the Church, and which regards the knowledge of merely natural things, and only, or at least primarily, the ends of earthly social life.  (Ibid)

49. The civil power may prevent the prelates of the Church and the faithful from communicating freely and mutually with the Roman pontiff. (Allocution "Maxima quidem", 9 June, 1862)

50. Lay authority possesses of itself the right of presenting bishops, and may require of them to undertake the administration of the diocese before they receive canonical institution, and the Letters Apostolic from the Holy See. (Allocution "Nunquam fore", 15 December, 1856)

51. And, further, the lay government has the right of deposing bishops from their pastoral functions, and is not bound to obey the Roman pontiff in those things which relate to the institution of bishoprics and the appointment of bishops.  (Allocution "Acerbissimum". 27 September, 1852, Damnatio "Multiplices inter", 10 June, 1851)

52. Government can, by its own right, alter the age prescribed by the Church for the religious profession of women and men; and may require of all religious orders to admit no person to take solemn vows without its permission.  (Allocution "Nunquam fore", 15 December, 1856)

53. The laws enacted for the protection of religious orders and regarding their rights and duties ought to be abolished; nay, more, civil Government may lend its assistance to all who desire to renounce the obligation which they have undertaken of a religious life, and to break their vows. Government may also suppress the said religious orders, as likewise collegiate churches and simple benefices, even those of advowson and subject their property and revenues to the administration and pleasure of the civil power. (Allocutions "Acerbissimum", 27 September, 1852; "Probe memineritis", 22 January, 1855; "Cum saepe", 26 July, 1855)

54. Kings and princes are not only exempt from the jurisdiction of the Church, but are superior to the Church in deciding questions of jurisdiction.  (Damnatio "Multiplices inter", 10 June, 1851)

55. The Church ought to be separated from the .State, and the State from the Church. (Allocution "Acerbissimum", 27 September, 1852)

VII. ERRORS CONCERNING NATURAL AND CHRISTIAN ETHICS

56. Moral laws do not stand in need of the divine sanction, and it is not at all necessary that human laws should be made conformable to the laws of nature and receive their power of binding from God. (Allocution "Maxima quidem", 9 June, 1862)

57. The science of philosophical things and morals and also civil laws may and ought to keep aloof from divine and ecclesiastical authority. (Ibid)

58. No other forces are to be recognized except those which reside in matter, and all the rectitude and excellence of morality ought to be placed in the accumulation and increase of riches by every possible means, and the gratification of pleasure.  (ibid; Encyclical "Quanto conficiamur", 10 August, 1863)

59. Right consists in the material fact. All human duties are an empty word, and all human facts have the force of right. (Allocution "Maxima quidem", 9 June, 1862)

60. Authority is nothing else but numbers and the sum total of material forces. (Ibid)

61. The injustice of an act when successful inflicts no injury on the sanctity of right.  (Allocution "Jamdudum cernimus", 18 March, 1861)

62. The principle of non-intervention, as it is called, ought to be proclaimed and observed.  (Allocution "Novos et ante", 28 September, 1860)

63. It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate princes, and even to rebel against them.  (Encyclical "Qui pluribus", 9 November, 1864; Allocution "Quibusque vestrum", 4 October, 1847; "Noscitis et Nobiscum", 8 December, 1849; Apostolic Letter "Cum Catholica".)

64. The violation of any solemn oath, as well as any wicked and flagitious action repugnant to the eternal law, is not only not blamable but is altogether lawful and worthy of the highest praise when done through love of country. (Allocution "Quibus quantisque", 20 April, 1849)

VIII. ERRORS CONCERNING CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE

65. The doctrine that Christ has raised marriage to the dignity of a sacrament cannot be at all tolerated. (Apostolic Letter "Ad Apostolicae", 22 August, 1851)

66. The Sacrament of Marriage is only a something accessory to the contract and separate from it, and the sacrament itself consists in the nuptial benediction alone.  (Ibid)

67. By the law of nature, the marriage tie is not indissoluble, and in many cases divorce properly so called may be decreed by the civil authority. (Ibid; Allocution "Acerbissimum", 27 September, 1852)

68. The Church has not the power of establishing diriment impediments of marriage, but such a power belongs to the civil authority by which existing impediments are to be removed.  (Damnatio "Multiplices inter", 10  June, 1851)

69. In the dark ages the Church began to establish diriment impediments, not by her own right, but by using a power borrowed from the State.  (Apostolic Letter "Ad Apostolicae", 22 August, 1851)

70. The canons of the Council of Trent, which anathematize those who dare to deny to the Church the right of establishing diriment impediments, either are not dogmatic or must be understood as referring to such borrowed power.  (Ibid)

71. The form of solemnizing marriage prescribed by the Council of Trent, under pain of nullity, does not bind in cases where the civil law lays down another form, and declares that when this new form is used the marriage shall be valid.

72. Boniface VIII was the first who declared that the vow of chastity taken at ordination renders marriage void.  (Ibid)

73. In force of a merely civil contract there may exist between Christians a real marriage, and it is false to say either that the marriage contract between Christians is always a sacrament, or that there is no contract if the sacrament be excluded. (Ibid; Letter to the King of Sardinia, 9 September, 1852; Allocutions "Acerbissimum", 27 September, 1852, "Multis gravibusque", 17 December, 1860)

74. Matrimonial causes and espousals belong by their nature to civil tribunals.  (Encyclical "Qui pluribus", 9 November, 1846; Damnatio "Multiplices inter", 10 June, 1851, "Ad Apostolicae". 22 August, 1851; Allocution "Acerbissimum", 27 September, 1852)

IX. ERRORS REGARDING THE CIVIL POWER OF THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF

75. The children of the Christian and Catholic Church are divided amongst themselves about the compatibility of the temporal with the spiritual power.  (Ad Apostolicae", 22 August, 1851)

76. The abolition of the temporal power of which the Apostolic See is possessed would contribute in the greatest degree to the liberty and prosperity of the Church.  (Allocutions "Quibus quantisque", 20 April, 1849, "Si semper antea", 20 May, 1850)

X. ERRORS HAVING REFERENCE TO MODERN LIBERALISM

77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. (Allocution "Nemo vestrum", 26 July, 1855)

78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. (Allocution "Acerbissimum", 27 September, 1852)

79. Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism.  (Allocution "Nunquam fore", 15 December, 1856)

80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.  (Allocution "Jamdudum cernimus", 18 March, 1861)

The faith teaches us and human reason demonstrates that a double order of things exists, and that we must therefore distinguish between the two earthly powers, the one of natural origin which provides for secular affairs and the tranquillity of human society, the other of supernatural origin, which presides over the City of God, that is to say the Church of Christ, which has been divinely instituted for the sake of souls and of eternal salvation.... The duties of this twofold power are most wisely ordered in such a way that to God is given what is God's (Matt. 22:21), and because of God to Caesar what is Caesar's, who is great because he is smaller than heaven. Certainly the Church has never disobeyed this divine command, the Church which always and everywhere instructs the faithful to show the respect which they should inviolably have for the supreme authority and its secular rights....

. . . Venerable Brethren, you see clearly enough how sad and full of perils is the condition of Catholics in the regions of Europe which We have mentioned. Nor are things any better or circumstances calmer in America, where some regions are so hostile to Catholics that their governments seem to deny by their actions the Catholic faith they claim to profess. In fact, there, for the last few years, a ferocious war on the Church, its institutions and the rights of the Apostolic See has been raging.... Venerable Brothers, it is surprising that in our time such a great war is being waged against the Catholic Church. But anyone who knows the nature, desires and intentions of the sects, whether they be called masonic or bear another name, and compares them with the nature the systems and the vastness of the obstacles by which the Church has been assailed almost everywhere, cannot doubt that the present misfortune must mainly be imputed to the frauds and machinations of these sects. It is from them that the synagogue of Satan, which gathers its troops against the Church of Christ, takes its strength. In the past Our predecessors, vigilant even from the beginning in Israel, had already denounced them to the kings and the nations, and had condemned them time and time again, and even We have not failed in this duty. If those who would have been able to avert such a deadly scourge had only had more faith in the supreme Pastors of the Church! But this scourge, winding through sinuous caverns, . . . deceiving many with astute frauds, finally has arrived at the point where it comes forth impetuously from its hiding places and triumphs as a powerful master. Since the throng of its propagandists has grown enormously, these wicked groups think that they have already become masters of the world and that they have almost reached their pre-established goal. Having sometimes obtained what they desired, and that is power, in several countries, they boldly turn the help of powers and authorities which they have secured to trying to submit the Church of God to the most cruel servitude, to undermine the foundations on which it rests, to contaminate its splendid qualities; and, moreover, to strike it with frequent blows, to shake it, to overthrow it, and, if possible, to make it disappear completely from the earth. Things being thus, Venerable Brothers, make every effort to defend the faithful which are entrusted to you against the insidious contagion of these sects and to save from perdition those who unfortunately have inscribed themselves in such sects. Make known and attack those who, whether suffering from, or planning, deception, are not afraid to affirm that these shady congregations aim only at the profit of society, at progress and mutual benefit. Explain to them often and impress deeply on their souls the Papal constitutions on this subject and teach, them that the masonic associations are anathematized by them not only in Europe but also in America and wherever they may be in the whole world.

To the Archbishops and Bishops of Prussia concerning the situation of the Catholic Church faced with persecution by that Government....

But although they (the bishops resisting persecution) should be praised rather than pitied, the scorn of episcopal dignity, the violation of the liberty and the rights of the Church, the ill treatment which does not only oppress those dioceses, but also the others of the Kingdom of Prussia, demand that We, owing to the Apostolic office with which God has entrusted us in spite of Our insufficient merit, protest against laws which have produced such great evils and make one fear even greater ones; and as far as we are able to do so with the sacred authority of divine law, We vindicate for the Church the freedom which has been trodden underfoot with sacrilegious violence. That is why by this letter we intend to do Our duty by announcing openly to all those whom this matter concerns and to the whole Catholic world, that these laws are null and void because they are absolutely contrary to the divine constitution of the Church. In fact, with respect to matters which concern the holy ministry, Our Lord did not put the mighty of this century in charge, but Saint Peter, whom he entrusted not only with feeding his sheep, but also the goats; therefore no power in the world, however great it may be, can deprive of the pastoral office those whom the Holy Ghost has made Bishops in order to feed the Church of God.