Modernism in the Catholic Church

In a historical perspective, Catholic Modernism is neither a system, school, or doctrine, but refers to a number of individual attempts to reconcile Roman Catholicism with modern culture;[1] specifically an understanding of the Bible and Catholic tradition in light of modern mainstream conceptions of archeology, philology, the historical-critical method and new philosophical and political developments of the late 19th and early 20th centuries—and implicitly all that this might entail.

For a history and broad definition of the term, see Modernism. For other uses of the word, see Modernism (disambiguation).
Part of a series on the
History of
Christian theology
Background
Theology · Early Christianity · Timeline · History of Christianity · Ecclesiastical polity · Trinitarianism · Nontrinitarianism · Restorationism · Christology · Mariology · Biblical canon · Deuterocanonical books · Persecution and tolerance
Ecumenical Creeds
Apostles' · Nicene
Chalcedonian · Athanasian
Patristics and Councils
Church Fathers · Augustine
Nicaea · Ephesus · Chalcedon
Post-Nicene development
Heresy · Monophysitism · Monothelitism · Iconoclasm · Gregory I · Alcuin · Photios · East–West Schism · Scholasticism · Aquinas · Anselm · Palamas
Reformation
Reformation · Luther (Theology of Martin Luther) · Melanchthon · Indulgences · Justification · Five solae · 95 Theses · Book of Concord · Predestination · Calvinism · Arminianism · English Reformation · Counter-Reformation · Trent
Since the Reformation
Pietism · John Wesley · Great Awakenings · Holiness movement · Restoration Movement · Existentialism · Liberalism (Secular theology · Modernism in the Catholic Church)  · Postliberal Theology  · Postmodernism (Radical orthodoxy)  · Neo-orthodoxy  · Paleo-orthodoxy  · Vatican II · Hermeneutics · Liberation theology · Christian anarchism · Christian Feminism (Asian feminist theology)  · Queer Theology  · Progressive Christianity · Theothanatology · Critical realism · Consequentialism (Situational ethics · Christian hedonism) · Transmodernism · Process theology · Open theism
 Christianity portal

The term came to prominence in Pope Pius X's 1907 encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis, which synthesized and condemned modernism as embracing every heresy.[2]

Writing in the Catholic Encyclopedia in 1911, the Jesuit Arthur Vermeersch gave a definition of modernism in the perspective of the Roman Catholic heresiology of his time: "In general we may say that modernism aims at that radical transformation of human thought in relation to God, man, the world, and life, here and hereafter, which was prepared by Humanism and eighteenth-century philosophy, and solemnly promulgated at the French Revolution."[3]

The modernist movement was influenced and accompagnied by Protestant theologians and clergy like Paul Sabatier and Heinrich Julius Holtzmann. On the other hand, "modernist" theologians were critical of Protestant theology and engaged in apologetics of the Roman Catholic Church against a Protestant understanding of Christianity, as in the famous attack of Alfred Loisy in L'Évangile et l'Église (1902) on Adolf von Harnack's Das Wesen des Christentums (1900).[4] The modernist movement has a parallel in the Church of England where the journal The Modern Churchman was founded in 1911.

The controversy on modernism was prominent in French and British intellectual circles and, to a lesser extent, in Italy, but, in one way or another, it concerned most of Europe and North America.[5] Pope Pius X saw modernism as a universal threat and he provoked a global reaction.[6]

The term modernism is generally used by critics of rather than adherents to positions associated with it.

Dimensions of the controversy on Modernism

Although the so-called modernists did not form a uniform movement, they responded to a common constellation of religious problems around 1900, which transcended Catholicism: First of all the problem of historicism which seemed to render all historical forms of faith and tradition relative. Secondly, through the reception of modern philosophers like Immanuel Kant, Maurice Blondel, and Henri Bergson the neo-scholastic philosophical and theological framework set up by Pope Leo XIII became fragile. The assertion that objective truth is received subjectively is indeed fundamental for the entire controversy.[7] This focus on the religious subject engendered a renewed interest in mysticism, sanctity[8] and religious experience in general.[9] The aversion against a religious "extrinsicism" also led to a new hermeneutics for doctrinal definitions which were seen as secondary formulations of an antecedent (immanent) religious experience (George Tyrrell; cfr. also the Christian personalism of Lucien Laberthonnière[10]).

The controversy was not restricted to the field of philosophy and theology. On the level of politics, Christian Democrats like the layman Marc Sangnier in France and the priest Romolo Murri in Italy, but also the left wing of the Centre Party and the Christian Unions in Germany, opted for a political agenda which was no more completely controlled by the hierarchy. Pope Pius X reacted by excommunicating Murri in 1909, by dissolving Sangnier's Sillon movement in 1910, and by issuing the encyclical Singulari quadam in 1912 which clearly favoured the German Catholic workers' associations over against the Christian Unions.[11] Furthermore, antimodernists like Albert Maria Weiss OP[12] and the Swiss Caspar Decurtins[13], which were both favoured by Pius X, would even find "literary modernism" on the field of the Catholic belles-lettres which did not meet their standards of orthodoxy.[14]

In the eyes of the antimodernist reaction, the "modernists" were a uniform and secret sect within the Church. In a historical perspective, one can discern networks of personal contacts between "modernists", especially around Friedrich von Hügel and Paul Sabatier. On the other hand, there was a great bandwidth of opinions within the "movement", from people ending up in rationalism (e.g. Marcel Hébert[15], Albert Houtin, Salvatore Minocchi, Joseph Turmel[16]) to a mild religious reformism, even including neo-scholastic theologians like Romolo Murri.[17] This perception of a broad movement from left to right was already shaped by the protagonists themselves.[18][19]

Terminology: From Liberal Catholicism to Modernism

Liberal Catholicism was a current of thought within the Catholic Church that was influential in the 19th century, especially in France, and aimed at reconciling the Church with liberal democracy. It is largely identified with French political theorists such as Felicité Robert de Lamennais, Henri Lacordaire, and Charles Forbes René de Montalembert influenced, in part, by a similar contemporaneous movement in Belgium.[20]

In 1881, the Belgian economist Charles Périn, a conservative Roman Catholic layman, published a volume titled Le modernisme dans l’église d’après les lettres inédites de La Mennais. Périn was the first author to use the term "modernism" in a Catholic context - before him the Dutch Calvinist Abraham Kuyper had attacked the rationalist German theology of the Protestant Tübingen School as "modernism" (Het modernisme een fata morgana op christelijk gebied, 1871). For Périn "modernism" was a label for the attempts of Liberal Catholics to reconcile Catholicism with the ideals of the French Revolution and of democracy in general. He saw the danger that humanitarian tendencies in secular society would be received within the Catholic Church. This "social" definition of Catholic Modernism would be taken up again later by Integralism. Périn's usage of the term "modernism" was accepted by the Roman journal of the Jesuits, the semi-offical Civiltà Cattolica, which added the aspect of an exaggerated trust in modern science to this concept. When five exegetical books of the French theologian Alfred Loisy were placed on the Index of Forbidden Books in December 1903, the official papal paper L'Osservatore Romano distinguished between "modernity" and "modernism", which entailed heresy in religion, revolution in politics, and error in philosophy. The term "modernist" now began to replace older labels like "Liberal Catholic" or "Reform Catholic".[21]

George Tyrrell (1861-1909)

The connection between “Liberal Catholicism” and “Modernism” has been subject to controversial discussion. In 1979, Thomas Michael Loome stressed the continuity between the two and talked of a “vertical dimension” of the modernist controversy.[22] This “invention of tradition” was criticized - amongst others - by Nicholas Lash.[23] It is clear, however, that “modernists” like George Tyrrell compared their own difficulties after the publication of Pascendi with the difficulties of “liberal catholics” like Ignaz von Döllinger after Vatican I. In December 1907, Tyrrell wrote to a German correspondent: “Is it not time to reconsider the pseudo-council of 1870 and to ask whether the Alt-Katholiks were not, after all, in the right? Ex fructibus eorum etc. may surely be used as a criterion of Ultramontanism. Individuals, like myself, can afford to stand aloof as Döllinger did. But can multitudes live without sacraments and external communion? And yet now no educated man or woman will be able to remain in communion with Pius X.”[24] Tyrrell was also inspired by the posthumous publication of Lord Acton's History of Freedom and Other Essays in 1907.[25]

History of the Modernist Controversy

Although the so-called "Modernist Crisis"[26] is usually dated between 1893 (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus) and 1914 (death of Pope Pius X)[27][28], the controversy has had a pre-history and also a post-history.

Pre-history: controversies under Pope Pius IX
Ernest Renan

With notable exceptions like Richard Simon or the Bollandists, Catholic studies in the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries tended to avoid the use of critical methodology because of its rationalist tendencies. Frequent political revolutions, bitter opposition of “liberalism” to the church, and the expulsion of religious orders from France and Germany, made the church understandably suspicious of the new intellectual currents.[29] It has been claimed in 1913 by the French academic Edmond Vermeil that the Catholic Tübingen School in the mid-19th century, with its interest for the "organic development" of the Church in history, was a “forerunner” of “modernism”[30] – a claim which has been contested ever since.[31]

In 1863, Ernest Renan published Vie de Jésus (Life of Jesus). Renan had trained for the priesthood before choosing a secular career as a philologist and historian. His book described Jesus as "un homme incomparable", a man, no doubt extraordinary, but only a man. The book was very popular, but cost him his chair of Hebrew at the College de France. Among Renan's most controversial ideas was that "a miracle does not count as a historical event; people believing in a miracle does. Renan’s Jesus is a man of simple piety and almost unimaginable charisma whose main historical significance was his legion of followers.[32]

In the same year 1863, the church historian Ignaz von Döllinger invited about a 100 German theologians to meet at Munich (Münchener Gelehrtenversammlung, 1863)[33] and to discuss the state of Catholic theology. In his address, “On the Past and Future of Catholic Theology”, Döllinger advocated for greater academic freedom of theology within the church. He formulated also a critique of neo-scholastic theology and championed the historical method in theology.[34] Also in the year 1863, Döllinger's friend Charles de Montalembert gave his famous discourse at the Catholic Congress in Mechelen, favouring the freedom of religion and conscience.

On 8 December 1864 Pope Pius IX issued the encyclical Quanta cura, decrying what he considered significant errors afflicting the modern age. It condemned certain propositions such as: "the people’s will, manifested by what is called public opinion..., constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control"; on civil law alone depend all rights of parents over their children, and especially that of providing for education; and that religious orders have no legitimate reason for being permitted.[35] Some of these condemnations were aimed at anticlerical governments in various European countries, which were in the process of secularizing education and taking over Catholic schools, as well as suppressing religious orders and confiscating their property.[36] Attached to the encyclical was a "Syllabus of Errors" which had been condemned in previous papal documents, requiring recourse to the original statements to be understood. The Syllabus reacted not only on modern atheism, materialism, and agnosticism, but also on Liberal Catholicism and the new critical study of the Bible. It was also a direct reaction on Döllinger's speech in Munich and Montalembert's discourse at Mechelen.[37] Among the propositions condemned in the Syllabus were:

  • "7. The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth."
  • "13. The method and principles by which the old scholastic doctors cultivated theology are no longer suitable to the demands of our times and to the progress of the sciences." — Letter to the Archbishop of Munich "Tuas libenter," Dec. 21, 1863.
  • "15. Every man is free to embrace and profess the Religion he shall believe true, guided by the light of reason." — Apostolic Letter „Multiplices inter“, 10th June 1851. Allocution „Maxima quidem“, 9th June 1862.

The First Vatican Council was held from December 1869 to October 1870. The council provoked a degree of controversy even before it met. In anticipation that the subject of papal infallibility would be discussed, many bishops, especially in France and Germany, expressed the opinion that the time was "inopportune". Ignaz von Döllinger led a movement in Germany hostile to the definition of infallibility. In Döllinger's view, there was no foundation for this definition in Catholic tradition.[38] After the definition, Döllinger was excommunicated by the Archbishop of Munich. Montalembert died before the end of the Council.

The dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Dei Filius, tried to steer a middle way between rationalism and fideism. It presented a concept of revelation which highlighted the aspect of divine instruction by revelation.[39] The dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus addressed the primacy of the pope and rejected the idea that decrees issued by the pope for the guidance of the Church are not valid unless confirmed by the secular power. It also declared the infallibility of the pope when speaking "ex cathedra" on matters of faith and morals. Other matters were deferred when the Piedmontese infantry entered Rome and the council was prorogued.[40]

The beginning of the Modernist Controversy under Pope Leo XIII
Pope Leo XIII

Pope Leo XIII wanted to advance what he understood as the true Christian science in every way: He worked for a revival of Thomism as Christian philosophy, he encouraged the study of history and archaeology, and in 1881 he opened up the Vatican Archives for researchers.[41] In 1887 he encouraged the study of the natural sciences, and in 1891 opened the Vatican Observatory.[42] Leo's response to the rationalist trend to undermine the authority of sacred scripture, was for the Church to have its own trained experts. In 1893, with Providentissimus Deus, Pope Leo gave the first formal authorization for the use of critical methods in biblical scholarship.[43] "Hence it is most proper that Professors of Sacred Scripture and theologians should master those tongues in which the sacred Books were originally written,[44] and have a knowledge of natural science.[45]. He recommended that the student of scripture be first given a sound grounding in the interpretations of the Fathers such as Tertullian, Cyprian, Hilary, Ambrose, Leo the Great, Gregory the Great, Augustine and Jerome,[46] and understand what they interpreted literally, and what allegorically; and note what they lay down as belonging to faith and what is opinion.[47]

Although Providentissimus Deus tried to encourage Catholic biblical studies, it created also problems. In the encyclical, Leo XIII excluded the possibility of restricting the inspiration and inerrancy of the bible to matters of faith and morals. Thus, he interfered in the lively discussion about biblical inspiration in France, where Maurice d'Hulst, the founder of the Institut Catholique de Paris, had opted for a more open solution in his article on La question biblique.[48] Not only exegetes of this "école large" were now in trouble, but also the prominent French theologian Alfred Loisy who worked for a thoroughly historical understanding of the Bible[49], in order to open up spaces for theological reform.[50] The Roman Congregation of the Index began to prepare a censuring of Loisy's main works, but until the death of Leo XIII in 1903 no decision was taken, as there was also considerable resistance within the Roman Curia against a premature judgment on matters of biblical interpretation.[51]

On the whole, the official Catholic attitude to the study of Sacred Scripture at the turn of the 20th century was one of cautious advance, and at the same time of a growing appreciation of what had promise for the future.[52] In 1902, Pope Leo XIII instituted the Pontifical Biblical Commission, which was to adapt Roman Catholic Biblical studies to modern scholarship and to protect Scripture against attacks.[53]

Marie-Joseph Lagrange

In 1890 the École Biblique, the first Catholic school specifically dedicated to the critical study of the bible, was established in Jerusalem by Dominican Marie-Joseph Lagrange. In 1892 Pope Leo XIII gave his official approval. While many of Lagrange's contemporaries criticized the new scientific and critical approach to the Bible, he made use of it. Lagrange founded the Revue Biblique, and his first articles drew sharp criticism, but Pope Leo was not inclined to discourage new ideas.[54] As long as Pope Leo lived, Lagrange's work quietly progressed, but after Leo's death, an ultra-conservative reaction set in.[54] The Historical-Critical Method was considered suspect by the Vatican. Père Lagrange, like other scholars involved in the 19th-century renaissance of biblical studies, was suspected of being a Modernist.[55] In 1912 Lagrange was given an order for the Revue Biblique to cease publication and to return to France. The École itself was closed for a year, and then Lagrange was sent back to Jerusalem to continue his work.

Duchesne and Loisy
Louis Duchesne, 1899

Louis Duchesne was a French priest, philologist, teacher, and amateur archaeologist. Trained at the École pratique des Hautes Études in Paris, he applied modern methods to Church history, drawing together archaeology and topography to supplement literature and setting ecclesiastical events within the contexts of social history. Duchesne held the chair of ecclesiastical history at the Institut Catholique de Paris, and was frequently in contact with like-minded historians among the Bollandists, with their long history of critical editions of hagiographies.[56] Duchesne gained fame as a demythologizing critical historian of the popular, pious lives of saints produced by Second Empire publishers.[57] However, his Histoire ancienne de l'Église, 1906‑11 (translated as Early History of the Christian Church) was considered too modernist by the Church at the time, and was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books in 1912.

Alfred Loisy

Alfred Loisy was a French Roman Catholic priest, professor and theologian generally credited as the "father of Catholic Modernism".[58][59] He had studied at the Institut Catholique under Duchesne and attended the course on Hebrew by Ernest Renan at the Collège de France. Harvey Hill says that the development of Loisy's theories have to be seen also in the context of France's Church-State conflict, which contributed to Loisy's crisis of faith in the 1880s. In November 1893, Loisy published the last lecture of his course, in which he summed up his position on Biblical criticism in five propositions: the Pentateuch was not the work of Moses, the first five chapters of Genesis were not literal history, the New Testament and the Old Testament did not possess equal historical value, there was a development in scriptural doctrine, and Biblical writings were subject to the same limitations as those by other authors of the ancient world.[60][61] When his attempts at theological reform had failed, Loisy came to regard the Christian religion more as a system of humanistic ethics than as divine revelation.[62] He was excommunicated in 1908.[63]

The climax of the controversy under Pope Pius X
Pope Pius X

Pope Pius X, who succeeded Leo XIII in August 1903, engaged almost immediately in the ongoing controversy. Reacting on pressure from the Parisian Archbishop Cardinal Richard, he transferred the censuring of Loisy from the Congregation of the Index to the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office. Already in December 1903, Loisy's main exegetical works were censured.[64] At the same time the Holy Office began to prepare a syllabus of errors contained in the works of Loisy. Due to ongoing internal resistance, especially from the Master of the Sacred Palace, the papal theologian Alberto Lepidi OP, this Syllabus was published only in July 1907 as the decree Lamentabili sane exitu, which condemned sixty-five propositions from the field of biblical interpretation and the history of dogma.[65] Lamentabili did not mention the term "modernism", and it seems that Pius X and his close collaborators like Cardinal Rafael Merry del Val and Cardinal José de Calasanz Vives y Tutó were not satisfied with the document.

Therefore, in the summer of 1907, another document was prepared in a small circle around the pope, and already in September 1907 Pius X promulgated the encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, which formulated a synthesis of modernism and popularized the term itself. The encyclical condemned modernism as embracing every heresy.[66]. Pascendi described the "modernist" in seven "roles": as purely immanentist philosopher, as believer who relies only on his own religious experience, as theologian who understands dogma symbolically, as historian and biblical scholar who dissolves divine revelation by means of the historical-critical method into purely immanent processes of development, as apologete who justifies the christian truth only from immanence, and as reformer who wants to change the Church in a radical way. Agnosticism, immanentism, evolutionism and reformism are the keywords used by the pope to describe the philosophical and theological system of modernism. The modernist is an enemy of scholastic philosophy and theology and resists the teachings of the magisterium. His moral qualities are curiosity, arrogance, ignorance, and falsehood. Modernists deceive the simple believers by not presenting their entire system, but only parts of it. Therefore the encyclical wants to reveal the secret system of modernism. Pascendi contained also disciplinary measures for the promotion of scholastic philosophy and theology in the seminaries, for the removal of suspect professors and candidates for the priesthood, for a more rigid censuring of publications and for the creation of an antimodernist control group in every diocese.[67] All bishops and superiors of religious orders had to report regularly on the execution of these measures.[68]

Pius frequently condemned the movement, and was deeply concerned that its adherents could go on believing themselves strict Catholics while understanding dogma in a markedly untraditional sense (a consequence of the notion of evolution of dogma). Therefore, in 1910, he introduced an anti-modernist oath to be taken by all Catholic priests[69], while he shut down "the only notable American Catholic magazine", the Ecclesiastical Review "precisely when it was needed to challenge the increasing influence of John Dewey’s pragmatism."[70]

To ensure enforcement of these decisions, Monsignor Umberto Benigni organized, through his personal contacts with theologians and laymen in various European countries, a secret network of informants who would report to him those thought to be teaching condemned doctrine or engaging in political activities (like Christian Democratic Parties, Christian Unions) which were also deemed to be “modernist” because they were not controlled by the Catholic hierarchy. This group was called the Sodalitium Pianum, i.e. Fellowship of Pius (V), the code name was La Sapinière.[71] Its frequently overzealous and clandestine methods often hindered rather than helped the Church in its combat with modernism.[72][73] Benigni also published the journal La Corrispondenza Romana/Correspondance de Rome which initiated press campaigns against practical and social modernism throughout Europe.[74] Benigni fell out with Cardinal Secretary of State Rafael Merry del Val in 1911. The Sodalitium was eventually dissolved in 1921. Recent research has stressed the antisemitic character of Benigni's antimodernism.[75]

Post-history in the twentieth century

After the pontificate of Pius X, "there was a gradual abatement of attacks against modernists, beginning in 1914 when Pope Benedict XV urged Catholics to cease condemning fellow believers."[76] Nevertheless theological antimodernism continued to influence the climate within the Church.[77] The Holy Office, until 1930 under the guidance of Merry del Val, continued to censure modernist theologians. In the 1930s, Loisy's opera omnia were placed on the Index of Forbidden Books. During World War I, French Catholic propaganda claimed that the German Catholics were infected by modernism.[78]

In the period between World War I and the Second Vatican Council Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange O.P. was a "torchbearer of orthodox Thomism" against modernism.[79] Garrigou-Lagrange, who was a professor of philosophy and theology at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas, Angelicum, is commonly held to have influenced the decision in 1942 to place the privately circulated book Une école de théologie: le Saulchoir (Étiolles-sur-Seine 1937) by Marie-Dominique Chenu O.P.[80] on the Vatican's "Index of Forbidden Books" as the culmination of a polemic within the Dominican Order between the Angelicum supporters of a speculative scholasticism and the French revival Thomists who were more attentive to historical hermeneutics, such as Yves Congar O.P.[81] At the beginning of the 1930s, Congar read the Mémoires of Loisy and realised that modernism had addressed problems in theology which were still not resolved by scholastic theology. Chenu and Congar started to write a dossier on this topic. In 1946, Congar wrote to Chenu that scholastic theology had already begun to "liquidate" itself on a daily basis and that the Jesuits were among the fiercest "liquidators".[82] Congar's Chrétiens désunis was also suspected of modernism because its methodology derived more from religious experience than from syllogistic analysis.[83][84]

The Second Vatican Council in the 1960s is seen as a vindication of much that the modernists maintained "in an environment of suspicion and unrelenting personal attack". The aggiornamento of the council incorporated most of the advances in biblical and church studies that had been put forth by Catholic scholars over the previous century.[76]

According to the Jesuit theologian Christoph Theobald, Vatican II has tried to resolve the following problems addressed by Alfred Loisy: 1. Inspiration of Holy Scripture: Loisy's view that divine inspiration cannot be restricted to certain areas of scripture, but that scripture was at the same time entirely "historical" has found an echo in the dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum where the principle that divine revelation has happened "for the sake of our salvation" and has been testified by Holy Scripture is combined with the task of scrutinizing Scripture in a historical-exegetical way. 2. In his inaugural address to the Second Vatican Council, Pope John XXIII distinguished between the depositum fidei and its historical forms of expression, thus echoing Loisy's distinction between "truth" and "doctrine." 3. The transcendental theology of Karl Rahner has synthesized the opposition of immanentism and extrinsicism which Loisy had problematized in many of his essays. Accordingly, Dei verbum has supplemented the instruction-centered model of revelation in the First Vatican Council by the concept of divine self-communication in history. 4. The concept of doctrinal development has been received in some dialectical formulations in Dei Verbum.[85]

Reference to modernism continues to survive among traditionalists within the Church.[86][87][88]

Notable persons involved in the Modernist Controversy

In America

The New York Review was a journal produced by Saint Joseph's Seminary (Dunwoodie). While the Review itself never published an article that was suspect, it did print papers by leading Catholic Biblical experts who were part of the newly emerging schools of Biblical criticism, which raised eyebrows in Rome. Around 1908, the Review was discontinued, ostensibly for financial reasons, although there is evidence that it was suppressed.[92]

  • Irish comedian Dermot Morgan lampooned the alleged Modernism of the Post-Vatican II Roman Catholic Church in Ireland while appearing on the RTÉ television show The Live Mike between 1979 and 1982. On the show, Morgan played a range of comic characters, including Father Trendy, a trying-to-be-cool Roman Catholic priest, who was given to drawing ludicrous parallels between religious and non-religious life in two-minute 'sermons' to the camera. Morgan's model for the character was Father Brian D'Arcy, a Left Wing Passionist priest who was trying to be the chaplain to the show business community in Dublin.
  • In the episode "The Bishops Gambit" of the British TV Series Yes, Prime Minister (Season 1, Episode 7, aired 17 September 1988), Prime Minister Hacker discusses candidates for an Anglican bishopric with Cabinet Secretary Sir Humphrey Appleby.[93] Sir Humphrey suggests a candidate who is a "modernist". He explains to the PM that this is a code for a non-believing clergyman.[94]

See also

References
  1. Bella, Julius I. “Father Tyrrell's Dogmas.” Church History, vol. 8, no. 4, 1939, pp. 316–341. JSTOR
  2. Pope Pius X (8 September 1907). "Pascendi Dominici Gregis". The Holy See (in Latin). Retrieved 8 June 2016.Pascendi dominici gregis English translation: https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/on-the-doctrine-of-the-modernists-3496
  3. Vermeersch, Arthur (1911). "Modernism". The Catholic Encyclopedia. 10. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved 8 June 2016.
  4. Poulat, Émile (1996). Histoire, dogme et critique dans la crise moderniste. Paris: Albin Michel. pp. 46–102. ISBN 9782226084644.
  5. O'Connell, Marvin Richard (1994). Critics on Trial: An Introduction to the Catholic Modernist Crisis. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press. ISBN 9780813208008. Retrieved 8 June 2016.
  6. Vian, Giovanni (2017). "Un mondo modernista? Note a partire dai rapporti a norma della Pascendi". In Arnold, Claus; Vian, Giovanni (eds.). The Reception and Application of the Encyclical Pascendi. Venice: Edizioni Ca'Foscari. pp. 265–296. doi:10.14277/6969-130-0/StStor-3-13. ISBN 9788869691300.
  7. Portier, William L., Divided Friends: Portraits of the Roman Catholic Modernist Crisis in the United States, CUA Press, 2013, p. xx [of the Introduction] ISBN 9780813221649
  8. Barmann, Lawrence; Talar, Charles J T, eds. (1999). Sanctity and Secularity during the Modernist Period: Six perspectives on hagiography around 1900. Paris: Société des Bollandistes. ISBN 9782873650070.
  9. Losito, Giacomo; Talar, Charles J T, eds. (2017). Modernisme, mystique, mysticisme. Paris: Honoré Champion. ISBN 9782745344496.
  10. Losito, Giacomo (2014). Dio soggetto della storia: Loisy, Blondel, Laberthonnière. Naples: Loffredo Editore. ISBN 9788875646691.
  11. Tacchi, Francesco (2018). "Curia romana e "Gewerkschaftsstreit": Prime considerazioni sull'origine dell'enciclica "Singulari quadam" (1912)". Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa. 54: 351–388. ISSN 0035-6573.
  12. Weiss, Otto (1998). Modernismus und Antimodernismus im Dominikanerorden: Zugleich ein Beitrag zum "Sodalitium Pianum". Pustet. ISBN 9783791716190.
  13. Metzger, Franziska (2000). Die "Schildwache": eine integralistisch-rechtskatholische Zeitung 1912-1945. Fribourg: Universitätsverlag Freiburg/Schweiz.
  14. Busemann, Jan Dirk (2017). Katholische Laienemanzipation und römische Reaktion: Die Indexkongregation im Literatur-, Gewerkschafts- und Zentrumsstreit. Paderborn: Schöningh. doi:10.30965/9783657777891. ISBN 9783657777891.
  15. Talar, Charles J. T., ed. (2011). The Modernist as Philosopher: Selected Writings of Marcel Hebert. Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America Press. ISBN 9780813218793.
  16. Talar, Charles J. T. (2012). Martyr to the Truth: The Autobiography of Joseph Turmel. Eugene OR: Pickwick Publicationes. ISBN 9781610978378.
  17. Poulat, Émile (2000). Modernistica : horizons, physionomies, débats. Paris: Nouvelles édition latines. ISBN 9782723301794.
  18. Hill, Harvey; Sardella, Louis-Pierre; Talar, Charles J. T. (2008). By Those Who Knew Them: French Modernists Left, Right, and Center. Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America Press. ISBN 9780813215372.
  19. For the case of von Hügel cfr. Arnold (1999). Katholizismus als Kulturmacht. pp. 245–250.
  20. Bury, J.P.T., "Religion and Relations of Churches and States", The New Cambridge Modern History, Vol. 10, CUP Archive, 1960 ISBN 9780521045483
  21. Arnold (2007). Kleine Geschichte des Modernismus. pp. 12–14.
  22. Loome, Thomas Michael (1979). Liberal Catholicism - Reform Catholicism - Modernism. A Contribution to a New Orientation in Modernist Research. Mainz: Grünewald. ISBN 9783786706601.
  23. Lash, Nicholas (1980). "The modernist minefield". The Month. 241: 16–19.
  24. Arnold, Claus (1999). Katholizismus als Kulturmacht. pp. 209–210.
  25. Loome (1979). Liberal Catholicism. pp. 40–48.
  26. O'Connell (1994). Critics on Trial.
  27. Arnold (2007). Kleine Geschichte des Modernismus.
  28. Vian (2012). Il modernismo.
  29. Donahue, John R., "Biblical Scholarship 50 years After Divino Afflante Spiritu", America, September 18, 1993
  30. Vermeil, Edmond (1913). Jean-Adam Möhler et l'école catholique de Tubingue (1815-1840). Étude sur la théologie romantique en Wurtemberg et les origines germaniques du modernisme. Paris: Colin.
  31. Warthmann, Stefan (2011). Die Katholische Tübinger Schule. Zur Geschichte ihrer Wahrnehmung. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. ISBN 9783515098564.
  32. Theiss, Will. "The Pale Galilean: Ernest Renan, Jesus, and Modern History", Marginalia, Los Angeles Review of Books, March 16, 2018
  33. Bischof, Franz Xaver; Essen, Georg (2015). Theologie, kirchliches Lehramt und öffentliche Meinung: Die Münchener Gelehrtenversammlung von 1863 und ihre Folgen. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. ISBN 9783170289499.
  34. Howard, Thomas Albert. "A Question of Conscience", Commonweal, September 29, 2014
  35. Pope Pius IX. Quanta Cura, §4, December 8, 1864
  36. Hales, E.E.Y. The Catholic Church in the Modern World, (Doubleday, 1958)
  37. Martina, Giacomo (1998). "Verso il sillabo: Il parere del barnabita Bilio sul discorso di Montalembert a Malines nell'Agosto 1863". Archivum Historiae Pontificiae. 36: 137–181.
  38. Bischof, Franz Xaver (1997). Theologie und Geschichte: Ignaz von Döllinger (1799–1890) in der zweiten Hälfte seines Lebens. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. ISBN 9783170148451.
  39. Seckler, Max (2000). "Der Begriff der Offenbarung". Handbuch der Fundamentaltheologie. 2. Stuttgart: UTB Kohlhammer. pp. 41–61. ISBN 9783825281717.
  40. Kirch, Joseph. "Vatican Council." The Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 15. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 15 May 2019 This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  41. Chadwick, Owen (1976). Catholicism and History: The Opening of the Vatican Archives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 97–103.
  42. Murphy, Richard T. “The Teachings of the Encyclical ‘Providentissimus Deus’”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 2, 1943, pp. 125–140. JSTOR
  43. Prior, Joseph G., The Historical Critical Method in Catholic Exegesis, Gregorian Biblical BookShop, 1999 ISBN 9788876528255
  44. Pope Leo XIII. "Providentissimus Deus", §17, November 18, 1893, Libreria Editrice Vaticana
  45. Providentissimus Deus, §18.
  46. Providentissimus Deus, §7.
  47. Providentissimus Deus, §19.
  48. Beretta, Francesco (1996). Monseigneur d’Hulst et la science chrétienne: Portrait d’un intellectuel. Paris: Beauchesne.
  49. Arnold, Claus (2016). Wischmeyer, Oda (ed.). "Alfred Loisy. Études bibliques (1903)". Handbuch der Bibelhermeneutiken. Von Origenes bis zur Gegenwart. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter: 593–602.
  50. Beretta, Francesco (1999). "De l'inerrance absolue à la vérité salvifique de l'Ecriture. Providentissimus entre Vatican I et Vatican II". Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie. 46: 461–501.
  51. Arnold, Claus; Losito, Giacomo (2009). La censure d'Alfred Loisy (1903). Les documents des Congrégations de l´Index et du Saint Office (Fontes Archivi Sancti Officii Romani 4). Vatican City: Libreria editrice vaticana.
  52. "Regarding history of Biblical interpretation", Catholic Sentinel, Archdiocese of Portland., December 13, 2011
  53. "Biblical Commission." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
  54. Becker O.P., John Vianney. "Pere LaGrange", Dominicana
  55. "Our Founder", École biblique et archéologique française de Jerusalem
  56. De Smedt, Charles. "The Bollandists." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 2. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907. March 15, 2013 This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  57. Strenski, Ivan. Theology and the First Theory of Sacrifice, BRILL, 2003, p. 220 ISBN 9789047402732
  58. Heiler, Friedrich (1947). Alfred Loisy: Der Vater des katholischen Modernismus. Munich: Federmann.
  59. Wolfgang Weiß (1993). "Loisy, Alfred Firmin". In Bautz, Traugott (ed.). Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon (BBKL) (in German). 5. Herzberg: Bautz. cols. 190–196. ISBN 3-88309-043-3.
  60. Boynton, Richard Wilson. "The Catholic Career of Alfred Loisy", The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 11, No. 1 (1918), pp. 36-73, Cambridge University Press
  61. Morrow, Jeffrey L. (2019). Alfred Loisy and Modern Biblical Studies. Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press. ISBN 9780813231211.
  62. Schultenover, David G."The Politics of Modernism: Alfred Loisy and the Scientific Study of Religion (review)", The Catholic Historical Review, vol. 89 no. 1, 2003, pp. 114-115
  63. Encyclopedia Americana (Volume 17: 1969), pgs 707-708. Article by Francis J. Hemelt of The Catholic University of America
  64. Arnold, Claus; Losito, Giacomo (2009). La censure d'Alfred Loisy (1903).
  65. Arnold, Claus; Losito, Giacomo (2011). "Lamentabili sane exitu" (1907): Les documents préparatoires du Saint Office. Vatican City: Libreria editrice vaticana.
  66. Arnold, Claus; Vian, Giovanni (2020). La Redazione dell’enciclica Pascendi: Studi e documenti sull’antimodernismo di Papa Pio X. Stuttgart: Hiersemann. ISBN 9783777220352.
  67. Arnold (2007). Kleine Geschichte des Modernismus. pp. 105–107.
  68. Arnold, Claus; Vian, Giovanni (2017). The Reception and Application of the Encyclical Pascendi: The Reports of the Diocesan Bishops and the Superiors of the Religious Orders until 1914. Venice: Edizioni Ca' Foscari. doi:10.14277/978-88-6969-130-0. ISBN 9788869691300.
  69. Schepers, Judith (2016). Streitbare Brüder: Ein parallelbiographischer Zugriff auf Modernismuskontroverse und Antimodernisteneid am Beispiel von Franz und Konstantin Wieland. Paderborn: Schöningh. ISBN 9783506777904.
  70. "Blast From the Past: Pope St. Pius X". National Catholic Reporter. 2010-09-03. Retrieved 2019-12-30.
  71. Poulat, Émile (1969). Intégrisme et catholicisme intégral. Un réseau secret international antimoderniste: La «Sapinière» (1909-1921). Tournai: Casterman.
  72. "Modernism (Roman Catholicism)". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. 8 December 2006. Retrieved 8 June 2016.
  73. Thomas Marschler (2002). "Benigni, Umberto". In Bautz, Traugott (ed.). Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon (BBKL) (in German). 20. Nordhausen: Bautz. cols. 113–116. ISBN 3-88309-091-3.
  74. Poulat, Émile (1977). Catholicisme, démocratie et socialisme: Le mouvement catholique et Mgr Benigni de la naissance du socialisme à la victoire du fascisme. Tournai: Casterman.
  75. Valbousquet, Nina (2020). Catholique et antisémite: Le réseau de Mgr Benigni, 1918-1934. Paris: CNRS Editions. ISBN 9782271116956.
  76. "Viewpoint: Revisiting the modernists". natcath.org. Retrieved 2019-12-30.
  77. "Nach dem Antimodernismus? Wege der katholischen Theologie 1918-1958". Rottenburger Jahrbuch für Kirchengeschichte. 32. 2013.
  78. Arnold, Claus (2017). "La Guerre Allemande et le Catholicisme (1915): Catholic Theological War Propaganda and the Modernist Crisis" (PDF). Modernism. Brescia: Morcelliana. 3: 193–212.
  79. Losito, Giacomo (2011). "Le eredità/2: i postumi della crisi modernista [1914-1958]" [Inheritances / 2: The Aftermath of the Modernist Crisis [1914-1958]]. Treccani (in Italian). l'Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana. Retrieved 8 June 2016.
  80. On Chenu's role in intra-thomist controversies see McInerny, Ralph (2006). Praeambula Fidei: Thomism and the God of the Philosophers. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press. pp. 108–125. ISBN 9780813214580. Retrieved 8 June 2016.
  81. Fouilloux, Étienne (2012). "Première alerte sur le Saulchoir (1932)". Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques. 96: 93–105.
  82. Congar, Yves (2005). Fouilloux, Étienne (ed.). Journal d'un Théologien (1946-1956). Paris: CERF. p. 24. ISBN 9782204065313.
  83. Congar, Yves (1937). Chrétiens désunis: principes d'un "oecuménisme" catholique [Disunited Christians: Principles of a Catholic "Ecumenism"]. Unam sanctam (in French). 1. Paris: Éditions du Cerf. Retrieved 8 June 2016.
  84. McBrien, Richard P., ed. (1995). "Modernism". The HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholicism (1st ed.). New York: Harper Collins. p. 304. ISBN 9780060653385. Retrieved 8 June 2016.
  85. Theobald, Christoph (2010). Laplanche, François (ed.). "L'apologétique historique d'Alfred Loisy. Enjeux historiques et théologiques d'un livre inédit". Alfred Loisy. La crise de la foi dans le temps présent. Essais d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses. Turnhout: Brepols: 587–693. doi:10.1484/M.BEHE-EB.4.00222. ISBN 9782503531823.
  86. "Modernism". Catholic Answers. Retrieved 2019-12-30.
  87. "The Seven Great Threats to the Catholic Church in Modern America". www.saintaquinas.com. Retrieved 2019-12-30.
  88. "Manifestations of Modernism". www.catholicculture.org. Retrieved 2019-12-30.
  89. Buonaiuti, Ernesto, 1881-1946. (1908). The programme of modernism : a reply to the encyclical of Pius X, Pascendi dominici gregis. T. Fisher Unwin. ISBN 0-7905-7208-7. OCLC 689131918.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  90. Roditi, Edouard (1946). "Henri Brémond: Poetics as Mystagogy". The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. 4 (4): 229–235. doi:10.2307/426531. ISSN 0021-8529. JSTOR 426531.
  91. Klapczynski, Gregor (2013). Katholischer Historismus? Zum historischen Denken in der deutschsprachigen Kirchengeschichte um 1900: Heinrich Schrörs – Albert Ehrhard – Joseph Schnitzer. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. ISBN 9783170234260.
  92. DeVito, Michael J., "The New York Review (1905-1908)", (New York: United States Catholic Historical Society, 1977), Chapter 6
  93. "IMDb Yes, Prime Minister (TV Series) The Bishops Gambit". Retrieved 2020-08-12.
  94. "IMDb: Yes, Prime Minister (TV Series) The Bishops Gambit. Quotes". Retrieved 2020-08-12.

Bibliography
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.