Skip to main content

Defining terms: modernism - From Tantamergo

I saw this on AngelQueen and decided that it was just the thing for today.

Source

Defining terms: modernism September 18, 2013

Posted by tantamergo in BasicscatachesisChristendomdisastererror,foolishnessGeneral Catholicsadnessscandalssecularismsexual depravity,Societythe enemy
trackback

Many Catholics may have heard the term “modernism,” and I think readers of this blog will have seen it enough times as to induce dyspepsia, but many don’t have a strong understanding of what the term means.  It’s a term that’s been around for quite a long time – well over a century – but like the heresy it is named after, modernism tends to be fuzzy and nebulous and difficult to define.  Hopefully, with some help from Michael Davies, this post will help clarify this very widespread system of error.

Modernism as a term dates back at least to the late 19th century, and the term received precise definition from Pope St. Pius X in his encyclical condemning modernism, Pascendi Dominici Gregis.  Pope St. Pius X defined modernism not as one theological error, but an entire system of errors, built around erroneous and destructive modern philosophy derived from such minds as Immanuel Kant, Hegel, John Locke, Charles Darwin, and many others. It was a philosophical and theological system that attempted to combine irreconciliable belief systems, one political-social, and the other-scientific religious, with Catholicism.  To put it more plainly, modernism attempted to reconcile Catholicism with both liberalism and belief in “scientific” evolution. As happens in all such cases, the errors of liberalism and acceptance of Darwinian evolution crushed belief in orthodox Catholicism, so that the katholycism that emerged was severely distorted, even deranged.Descent_of_the_Modernists,_E__J__Pace,_Christian_Cartoons,_1922
Modernism is so dangerous because it is so all-encompassing.  There is an old cartoon called “The Descent of the Modernists” shown at right.  That cartoon pretty well encompasses how acceptance of modernist beliefs tends to progress in the minds of its adherents. Modernism has a strong capacity to utterly destroy any belief in the supernatural, to reduce God to some humanist, pantheist deity (pantheists believe that God does not exist separately from men, but is comprised of something like “The Force” from Star Wars, God is some kind of energy field or being associated with all living things, especially believers.  In a sense, modernists believe we “create” god with our belief), and to severely undermine such core Christian concepts as the Incarnation, Virgin Birth, miracles, the Real Presence, even the Resurrection.  I’m sure many readers have stumbled across modernist Katholycs who have told them that all the old pieties like the Rosary or Adoration are wrong – well, that is because that wayward person, under the influence of modernism, no longer believes like a Catholic, at all.
Whereas previous heresies tended to attack one or a few Dogmas, modernism attacks the entire edifice of Christianity in one fell swoop, leading to apostasy, even atheism, in any practical definition of the term.  But modernism does not just attack Christianity (although its results are most devastating there, because Catholic Christianity forms such a cohesive theological-philosophical whole), it attacks any religion postulating belief in a transcendent God.  This aspect of modernism is why Pope St. Pius X called modernism “the synthesis of all heresies,” because it is such a totality of disbelief and rejection that it encompasses all the previous heresies, while adding still more error to its destructive mix.
I believe it was the great St. Augustine who said that of all the sins, sins of intellectual pride are the most difficult to overcome.  Modernism has always appealed most to the intellectual elite, who, like new gnostics, develop a highly arcane belief system that only the “enlightened” can accept and believe. Those without the special knowledge of the gnostic/modernists are Philistines, cast out from elite academic/intellectual circles and constantly derided in modernist circles. A “pack mentality” develops (described brilliantly by Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi), which has been particularly effective in enforcing lock-step acceptance of modernism, especially among academia and those with intellectual ambitions.  This explains why modernism has been so incredibly effective at penetrating the Catholic university and turning almost whole religious orders – especially religious orders with an inordinate focus on intellectual pursuits, like the Jesuits – over to this synthesis of all errors.
Modernism tends to start very subtly.  It starts with a revered teacher making snide remarks about “errors” in the Bible to his class.  Or with a priest darkly hinting at the Blessed Mother’s ”unchastity” prior to the Virgin Birth. Soon, attacks on “fairy tales” like the Creation history of Genesis 1-3 moves onto attacking the reliability of the Gospels themselves.  Soon, the teacher, assuring the class that only silly old women still believe the Catholic fairy tales, and sometimes viciously mocking those who attempt to defend the Faith, is openly questioning the Divinity of Christ and almost any Dogma you care to name.  Slowly, by degrees, the students are either won over wholeheartedly to modernism, or they are at least left bewildered skeptics, unsure of what to believe, and easy prey for “concerned” protestant friends.  This paragraph probably roughly sketches the experience of millions of souls over the past several decades, especially those innocents entrusted by their parents to Catholic schools, which, being a lower arm of academia, are absolutely infested with modernism.
But even those of us who have never attended Catholic schools, existing as we do in an intellectual milieu almost totally gone over to modernism, and with the former bastions of the Church deliberatey razed to allow the forces of modernism to run amok in the Church, rarely escape being affected with its errors.  It is difficult to explain just how much the thinking of the average – or even the far above average – Catholic has been modified and degraded by the pernicious influence of modernism.  Even the very best Catholics often have some modernist baggage they are unaware of, the fruit of swimming in error infested waters their entire life. I strongly advise reading Pascendi, and then slowly and prayerfully examining one’s own life for the presence of modernist beliefs.
I know I haven’t, perhaps, given a complete definition, but I am out of town for today. I will, God willing, expand on this definition in the coming weeks, with the help of Michael Davies book Partisans of Error: St. Pius X Against the Modernists.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

 + JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org   A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...

Correcting Caricatures of the SSPX

 + JMJ Introduction First, a little background on the FSSP St. John Vianney Chapel in Mission Hill Kansas.  After the 1988 consecrations and the foundation of the FSSP there was a consistent trend of Dioceses allowing the SSPX to run chapels and churches near SSPX locations. As with any 'organizational change' there were those who didn't agree with the change and no longer sought the sacraments from the SSPX. I heard from friends that in that era there was a lot of anger and tension (on both sides) between the St. Mary's SSPX and Mission Hill FSSP.  Second, there have been caricatures of the SSPX position (some are evident below) in which personal opinions of SSPX priests and laity are taken as the official position or conflated with those of sedevacantists or 'resistance'. Recent Perspectives of the SSPX Position In the shadow of the consecrations a fever pitch accusations and opinions how surfaced - many of which include caricatures of the SSPX positions, of w...

SSPX: Why Is the SSPX So Criticized?

 + JMJ As long as you are ok with what happens in other Catholic Churches, Traditional Catholics will be left 'alone'.  This is a paraphrase of words spoken by an Archbishop to Traditional Catholics (with a sprinkling of SSPX) who had requested the Traditional Latin Mass under Summorum Pontificum. This reflects that attitude of the Church towards anyone who takes issue with some of the ambiguities of Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium.  If you reject the papacy but are ok with V2, the New Mass, and what Rome has stated since 1965 - then you are welcome. Question some of the more abiguous statements and ask for Rome to realise that a circle is not a square - then you are in for a world of hurt. This is where the SSPX exists and has existed from almost its very first moments. Pointing out contradictions with previous magisterium is not acceptable - under any condition. Why? Because it will cause the whole V2 house of cards to fall. I guess only when the contradic...

Stories: Early Days of Tradition Part 8 - Convention Centre Chapel

 + JMJ I came to Tradition a few years after they had bought a chapel. My wife told me of the earlier years when Fr. Normandin would come to town and Mass would be held in a room at the convention centre.  He'd start by blessing the room and then proceed with Mass. This went on for a while before the one of the faithful found a small hall that would suit just fine. They pooled their money and bought the building.  Then came the work as the retiree's refinished the floor, setup the sactuary. Oh, did I mention that I heard that the hall had been used by a motorcycle gang? The floor needed a lot of work.  I remember seeing pictures of the founders working to make the hall into a fitting place for the Sacrifice of the Mass. That little chapel would be a refuge like many others serviced by Fr. Normandin.  From Thunderbay, Ontrario to Nanaimo, British Columbia - the SSPX chapels are all the results of Fr. Normandin's missionary work in those desperate times. Without h...

How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD!

 + JMJ How many more must die for the throne? (Movie Quote: Prince Caspian) The Spread of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt I've seen a lot of FUD spreading across the intergnat on various stats etc.   So let's put this in context ... especially the perspective of those people in positions of authority who need to make decisions to protect the lives of their citizens. Yep, this is going to be that type of post.  Like it or not the leaders of our governments have their authority from God.  So, as Catholics should know, you need to have a very good reason to deliberately disobey the orders of their superiors. This is basic St. Thomas Aquinas ... so don't blame me for discussing things from a Catholic perspective. The leaders of our countries have taken action to protect the vulnerable of our countries.   As much as the young and not-so-young may whine and complain - I have to ask how many more of our elderly have to die? What the armchair virologists and ec...