CATECHISM ON MODERNISM – PART I – THE MODERNIST AS THEOLOGIAN – II. DIVINE PERMANENCE

PART I
THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS

CHAPTER III

THE MODERNIST AS THEOLOGIAN
I. THEOLOGICAL IMMANENCE AND SYMBOLISM
II. DIVINE PERMANENCE

Q. With this principle of immanence is there not, according to the Modernists, another one connected?

A. ‘With this principle of immanence is connected another, which may be called the principle of divine permanence.’

Q. In what does this principle differ from the first?

A. ‘It differs from the first in much the same way as the private experience differs from the experience transmitted by tradition.’

Q. That is not very clear. Will you not explain this doctrine?

A. ‘An example illustrating what is meant will be found in the Church and the Sacraments.’

Q. What do they say about the institution of the Church and the Sacraments?

A. ‘The Church and the Sacraments, according to the Modernists, are not to be regarded as having been instituted by Christ Himself.’

Q. But how is that? How is the immediate institution by Christ of the Church and the Sacraments opposed to the principles of the Modernists?

A. ‘This is barred by Agnosticism, which recognizes in Christ nothing more than a man whose religious consciousness has been, like that of all men, formed by degrees; it is also barred by the law of immanence, which rejects what they call external application; it is further barred by the law of evolution, which requires for the development of the germs time and a certain series of circumstances; it is, finally, barred by history, which shows that such, in fact, has been the course of things.’

Q. In that case the Church and the Sacraments have not been instituted by Christ?

A. ‘Still it is to be held, they affirm, that both Church and Sacraments have been founded mediately by Christ.

Q. But how? That is, how do the Modernist theologians endeavour to prove this divine origin of the Church and the Sacraments?

A. ‘In this way: All Christian consciences were, they affirm, in a manner virtually included in the conscience of Christ, as the plant is included in the seed.
But as the branches live the life of the seed, so, too, all Christians are to be said to live the life of Christ. But the life of Christ, according to faith, is divine, and so, too, is the life of Christians. And if this life produced, in the course of ages, both the Church and the Sacraments, it is quite right to say that their origin is from Christ, and is divine.’

Q. Do the Modernist theologians proceed in the same way to establish the divinity of the Holy Scriptures and of dogmas?

A. ‘In the same way they make out that the Holy Scriptures and the dogmas are divine.’

Q. Is this the whole of the Modernist theology?

A. ‘In this the Modernist theology may be said to reach its completion. A slender provision, in truth, but more than enough for the theologian who professes that the conclusions of science, whatever they may be, must always be accepted.! No one will have any difficulty in making the application of these theories to the other points with which We propose to deal.’ *

* The Sovereign Pontiff seems here to declare that it were superfluous to follow the believer and the theologian as well as the philosopher in what concerns the branches of the faith, as he has done for the faith itself. That is why, after putting under our eyes the hand-baggage of Modernist theology, and showing us how easy it is to follow up the parallelism, he will limit himself, except for some passing indications, to setting forth the Modernist philosophy concerning the branches of the faith. He leaves it to us to apply the principles of theology. AUTHOR.

CHAPTER IV : THE RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY OF THE MODERNISTS

BACK TO CONTENTS