jump to navigation

The rationalist roots of modernism September 19, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the enemy.
trackback

I read this great chapter in Michael Davies Partisans of Error: Pope St. Pius X Against the Modernists, regarding how the error of rationalism – the philosophical system of the materialist, enlightenment sophists – formed the background for modernist belief.  I thought this short chapter was very worth sharing. with my own emphasis and comments:

Dogma……..demands that man submits himself to an authority external to himself. [And this is precisely what modernist, “god derives from within us” belief specifically rejects.  You can see how protestant belief in private revelation, or everyman his own pope, tends towards modernist rejection of a separate, absolute God, and replaces that God with a little humanist god of our own making]  God, speaking through His Church, is the arbiter of what man must believe and how he must behave. Such an attitude to life is theocentric, centered on God.  From the conversion of the Roman Empire until well into the Renaissance this theocentric attitude of life permeated society.  But with the Renaissance a new attitude began to emerge  [but it actually wasn’t a new attitude, but the resurrection of the old pagan beliefs of pre-Christian Roman and Greek antiquity.  It was a deliberate rejection of the ethos of Christendom for a self-serving humanist ethos] in which, for all practical purposes, man turned in upon himself and became his own arbiter. [his own Pope. Protestantism flowed from the Renaissance as modernism flowed from the enlightenment, which was in turn based on protestantism, and the entire aim of all this, conscious or not, is the overthrowing of a God-centered society]  The story of humanism from its Renaissance roots to its logical conclusion in atheistic marxism has been accurately documented by Professor Thomas Molnar in his book Christian Humanism. He explains that:

It is the core of humanistic ideology that man is its exclusive center; in proportion as man is exalted, God is diminished in His absoluteness. We have seen that man’s self-exaltation takes the form of worshipping the “new man” whose locus of salvation is the “future.” [Oh how liberals love the future!  But modernists in particular love to use terms like “the Church becoming…..” or “God becoming in us….”, meaning a perfection through human means.  But liberals always fail in their promises of a better man through government, enlightenment, etc] In general, the humanistic  position assumes that man is the master of his destiny, and if he is not master in the present conditions, he must do everything to remove the obstacle and assert himself. This leads to the gradual abolition of all that had been held valid before, so that the “new man” emerges as really “the first man.”  [A “new Adam,” another sinless Adam, but this one is not sinless because He is the Son of God made Incarnate, but because he has achieved the height of liberal humanist perfection – a goal communists and other humanists have chased after, and only left devastation in their wake, rather than the promised, illusory, impossible “perfection.”]

Writing in 1970, Professor Louis Salleron provided a very similar analysis of the contemporary malaise in Christian society [and this is simply a brilliant excerpt]:

The common denominator of the disorders which we see today, as much in the field of doctrine as that of the liturgy, is in the last resort the progressive substitution of the Cult of Man for the Cult of God[And that substitution, is the precise aim of the modernist revolution in the Church, whether intended or not]  We overturn the traditional belief that God created man and that the Word was made flesh, to conceive a God who is nothing more than man himself in the process of becoming God. We adore the God who proceeds from ourselves[That is a devastating critique, and it points back directly to that same old error of private interpretation.  I can twist Scripture to say anything I want, to even make ME “god,” if I am free to interpret it however I see fit]  Between the Humanism of science and Marxism and that of the neo-Christians, whose prophet is Teilhard de Chardin, [whom you should recall from this blog]  there is no more than a semantic difference. The first announces the death of God and the second His birth. But neither the one nor the other believes in anything more than man himself who tomorrow will be the sole lord of the universe under his own name or that of God.

————-End Quote————–

Maybe all this attempted catechesis on modernism is boring.  But I plan on doing a lot more, because I hope to inform readers of tendencies, code words, and ideas to be on the lookout for when they are in church, in the Confessional, in reading, or wherever. If you find yourself confronted with modernism, my advice is to run, or drop the book, or just plain get away.  Modernists are extremely difficult to convert, and their arguments can be very seductive at times.  They may sound “right” for a very long time. Unless you have a really solid grounding in the true Faith, I would advise simply to go away.  And never expose children to modernists, especially modernist clergy, because the danger of their absorbing some error, and being led astray, are simply not worth the risk.  If you have any reasonable alternative, use it! Modernism is an all-encompassing error that is devised to crush the traditional conception of God and replace it with something truly diabolical.

And yet it is incredibly prevalent, heck, predominant, in the Church today.

Comments

1. Marguerite - September 20, 2013

Amen to this and yes it is prevalent because of the faulty teaching in the seminaries. The modernist clergy mix truth with error to get their idealogy across. Any priest who quotes from Hans Kung or Karl Rahner makes me wish I were deaf.

2. ccaterin - September 20, 2013

Giving tendencies, code words, and ideas to avoid sounds very helpful.

tantamergo - September 20, 2013

“We are Church”
“becoming”
Even though social justice is valid, the way it is conducted in the Church here in the US, and the people who conduct it, are overwhelmingly modernist
“Just faith”
A focus on a “personal god,” not a personal relationship with Jesus, but a “personal god,” an image of God that fits well with you
Any new age practice – enneagrams, nature meditation/prayers, power crystals, tantric, reiki, “finding god inside,” etc
I’ll try to think of more

3. Raul De La Garza III (@raul_delagarza) - September 20, 2013

Replace the traditional concept of God?! How? What? With this?

All this modernism…it’s His fault anyway, right? 😉


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: