I think all Catholics on Twitter need to have a discussion about what “Modernism” actually means in a Catholic context.
The problem with using the Pascendi definition is that it is talking about sympoms of a particular disease. Pascendi was an attempt to quash it, and another attempt was Pope Pius XII’s Humani generis (1950), which reflected the opinions of Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange.
Pascendi dealt with Modernism, and Humani generis dealt with neo-Modernism. Pius XII (echoing Pascendi) describes the “fictitious theories” involved: immanentism, idealism, materialism (historic or dialectical) and existentialism.
As theories, of these are undoubtedly contrary to Catholic teaching. “Immanentism” and “idealism” = the philosophy of Hegel. Dialectical materialism = Marx. Existentialism = Heiddeger and Sartre.
. . . to elucidate and explain what is contained in the deposit of faith only obscurely and implicitly.” The Teaching Authority is there to “guard and interpret the deposit of divinely revealed truth.” Not just “guard.”
Modernism attempts to explain the ideas of Catholic dogma from entirely different theological-philosophical foundations. In a Protestant context, this is what Schleiermacher did by reframing all of Christianity from the perspective of Hegelian idealism.
The Teaching Authority of the Church may further elucidate and interpret the deposit of faith, even to the extent of taking into consideration the historical situation of the Church, scientific progress, and political developments.
It may even look to some modern philosophies to glean whatever truth may be taken from them, since “even in these false theories a certain amount of truth is contained” (Pius XII). But the Teaching Authority must always proceed according to its theological foundations.
It can never adopt another theological-philosophical system wholesale, even if doing so would leave Church teaching superficially unchanged.
My point is that I don’t see Vatican II or Pope Francis as representing Modernism (which involves a complete reframing of Catholic teaching), but rather as representing the development or elucidation of Church teaching from the same deposit of faith.
If anything, Pascendi and Humani generis state that we must always respect the Teaching Authority of the Church, which is the only legitimate source of developments in Church teaching. We can’t appeal to modern philosophy or to the authority of the “old” Church.
It is easy to see how the change in the Catechism regarding the death penalty follows this path. Certainly it is better to let live than to kill, but in the past there was often no “let live” option—thus the death penalty was justified.
Now, there is everywhere a “let-live” option, and Pope Francis has decided that to call for the worldwide abolishment of the death penalty represents the fullest expression of the teaching on this issue, at this time.
Ok, done for now. Sorry for the endless thread. But these matters are in the air and its hard to ignore them.
MISSING TWEET: Pius XII, in describing these false theories, takes great care to dispel the idea that Church teaching is something fixed and frozen forever. He says, “together with the sources of positive theology God has given to His Church a living Teaching Authority . . .
