[. . .]
[Theological modernism] was little more than the result of a rather puerile desire of
Christians, especially clergymen and theologians, to avoid being
counter-cultural, to retain the same status and “relevance” in a secular
age as had been accorded them in a Catholic age. Therefore, by the
mid-20th century, Modernism had become the quasi-spiritual and
theological doorway through which a profound secularization entered into
the Church, as Catholics at every level embraced the opportunity
to reinterpret their faith and values in ways which made them more
compatible with the larger surrounding culture—a culture which was no
longer shaped in any significant way by the Faith.
The result was a rapid shift in Catholic sensibilities, beginning with a rejection of authority in favor of the zeitgeist
(spirit of the times or cultural spirit). Where in 1930 parishioners
would likely have been shocked if their priest undermined or
contradicted a clear statement of the Holy See, in 1980 parishioners
could very easily be moved to applaud the courage and vision such a
contradiction seemed to them to embody. This broad infection of
secularization in the Church led to countless abuses in preaching, in
the liturgy, in catechetics, in theology classes, and even in social
action and politics. In fact, as both the attitude of relativism and the
power of the State grew during the same period, Catholics began to see
things more and more in merely political terms. Every disagreement was
understood to be essentially a partisan struggle.
In some universities and religious communities, these attitudes
continue unabated even now that dioceses and parishes have begun to
heal. Efforts by the Holy See to correct the wayward are a perfect
example. The Holy See inevitably speaks in terms of the objective and
absolute truths Divinely revealed through Jesus Christ, and the Holy See
is inevitably dismissed as a bunch of old, celibate, white European
males making a power grab for a party whose relevance has long since
vanished from the world stage.
[. . .]
Read the whole thing.
Follow HancAquam or Subscribe
I think the author of this article stole his thesis from Timothy Radcliffe's "What's the point of being Christian?" Only Radcliffe called them Kingdom Catholics and Communion Catholics.
ReplyDeleteMaybe. But I doubt Friar Timothy agrees with his diagnosis!
DeleteFather, thanks for linking to this for us. Being both annoyingly introspective and one who prefers to observe rather than interact with people, I had noticed these tendencies both in myself and those around me, but couldn't put words to what I was seeing.
ReplyDeleteWhere in 1930 parishioners would likely have been shocked if their priest undermined or contradicted a clear statement of the Holy See, in 1980 parishioners could very easily be moved to applaud the courage and vision such a contradiction seemed to them to embody.
ReplyDeleteToo many of us now don't even recognize a heterodox statement when we hear one.
Exactly. Once the standards for orthodoxy have been undermined, deviations from orthodoxy are impossible to recognize.
Delete