A Reflection on Modernism and Protestantism

Modernism is Protestant. One might say that as an ideology, it is Protestantism with the Catholic trappings removed. Catholicism is a revealed religion, descended from on high (like a few others claim to be, but most religions just sort of developed in certain ethnic peoples, over time).

And "revealed religion" is the very thing Modernism rejects. It came from German Protestants about the time Darwin was making waves, and Modernism is all about evolution. Evolution of a certain sort. There was the natural Development of Doctrine, which could be said to be a form of evolution -- but if it were, the Holy Ghost directed it slowly, steadily, over the centuries.
Protestantism wrenched that away and created the basis for "Evolution by Fiat", a intentional redirection of Doctrine based not on lived experience threaded through centuries and many, many individuals, but something directed by revolutionaries with "novel" doctrines. (The very idea of Sola Scriptura cries out for absolute novelty from every single reader of Holy Writ.) Once that began, then a new form of evolution started, actually a devolution, resulting in the basic Modernist beliefs, seen in Mainline Prot Churches and the Mainline Catholic National Language Churches, i.e. everything evolves, we evolve, morality evolves (as in our understanding of the death penalty), the Faith evolves (obviously "the spirit" of Vat 2 operates on that notion), the Church evolves structurally, and ultimately God Himself evolves.

The corporate managers running the Church today were weaned on this core bone marrow of Modernism and I suspect they really don't have a clue as to what a revealed religion really implies; certainly they don't grasp what Catholicism means. If ever I had that rock in my gut, as a friend put it, of wondering about whether the current bishops, etc., were actual Catholics, I guess I passed that (rather large) kidney stone some time ago.

An Préachán

Would Pope Francis wash Cardinal Burke's feet? Easter Tridiuum and so the Foot Washing is upon us again...

Easter. Bunnies. Eggs. Feet washing. 

Our Caudillo, Jorge, made headlines in the past with washing the feet of Muslims and so on during this strange "rite". I suppose it is too much to hope for any sort of real understanding about what it is for – or should be for.

The whole foot-washing thing is a simple example of our hierarchy's not following Our Lord's example, but rather reinventing Him to serve their own self-identities.

The feet-washing thing is for the hierarchy, with bishops washing priests' feet and the pope washing bishops' feet. It is symbolic of their "working relationship", with the superiors acknowledging that they're there in service their fellow clerics who are below them on the Church's totem pole. Washing parishioners' feet therefore misses the point that this is about Church leaders' relations to each other. Our Most Blessed Lord did not wash the feet of just anybody, of course. Somehow our current leadership seems to just not be able to read (or think) clearly about either Holy Writ or Holy Rite.

But ask yourself the simple question: would Francis was Cardinal Burke's feet, or Cardinal Sarah's? Haha, to ask the question is to answer it. But clearly THOSE are the feet he should be washing, and which he never will. Bergoglio's washing Muslim feet (and etc.) obscures the whole thing hopelessly.

I think this whole fiasco sums up Bergoglio's papacy: confused, misdirected, and most definitely misdirecting.

An Préachán