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

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...

Schism

There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...

SSPX / DICI: Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure.

+ JMJ The following is the communiqué of the SSPX regarding the Bishop Williamson's consecration of Fr. Faure. As a follow-up to this article ,  I would like to highlight the rationale for denouncing the consecration. Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure. On March 19, 2015, Bishop Richard Williamson performed the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil. Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure have not been members of the Society of St. Pius X since 2012 and 2014, respectively, because of their violent criticisms of any relations with the Roman authorities. According to them, such contacts were incompatible with the apostolic work of Archbishop Lefebvre.(1) The Society of St. Pius X regrets sincerely that this spirit of opposition has led to an episcopal consecration. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre had c...

Bishop Huonder, SSPX in Schism? - Nope, Consecration of Holy Oils - Update 1

 + JMJ  So Bishop Huonder is in the news for two reasons.  First, his 'Testimony' concerning Pope Francis etc. This was received as a nice reinforcement by Trads (SSPX and others).  Of course, there are those that now are demanding an apostolic investigation.  Yawn, been here before.  This was predictable as other bishops who have followed the same path came to the same conclusions.  It is the way. Second, he celebrated the Chrism Mass and blessed the Holy Oils for use in the SSPX's European chapels and ceremonies.  This caused a stir amongst some Trads who are locked in one or the other statements made by either Archbishop Lefebvre or others. I received two versions of a question regarding this event: Hi Tradical Do you have any comments about doubtful oils in SSPX europe by +Huonder (NO Bishop not conditionally consecrated)? God Bless Hi Tradical Any thoughts on Huonder oil, not conditionally ordained and consecrated by SSPX bishops? God Bless M...