Pope Pius IX

[aball1035]

I heard a sermon the other day in which the priest said that Pius IX was “death to modernists” or something like that. Then on Wikipedia (an ever reliable source), it said that he was a very liberal pope.

How are these two reconciled? A “liberal modernist” sounds like a contradiction.

 

[Salvatore123]

I believe (and this is obviously not directed at you) the problem lies within the use of secular words (“liberal”, “conservative”, etc.) applied to Church leaders.

I have been called, at the very least, a “conservative” as far as the Church, and almost labeled a “near sedevacantist”, simply because I:

1. refuse to hold hands during the Our Father
2. refuse to assume the “orans” position of the priest
3. refuse to take communion in the hand
4. go to confession weekly
5. attend an approved Latin Mass

Aside from my attendance at the Latin Mass and Nos. 3 and 4, BOTH 1 and 2 are “improper”, as they are NOT permitted by the GIRM. I predict this will prompt some posts against my characterization, but a visitinig CARDINAL from Rome told this to me. The GIRM tells us HOW the Novus Ordo mass is to be said and WHAT is permitted.

People who take it upon themselves to add to what is specifically stated are presumptuous in the least, and, I might add, pretty arrogant to think that THEY feel they are “qualified” to decide how THEY want to participate in the celebration of Mass.

As I clearly state that this is MY opinion (and the opinion shared with me by a cardinal whose name I will not mention, for obvious reasons), please do not attack me personally.

If you want to “attack” my “improper” characterization, please feel free to do so - but at least use something with some measure of authority to do so. I cited the GIRM. If one can do better, I am all ears . . .

 

[Ridgerunner]

I heard a sermon the other day in which the priest said that Pius IX was “death to modernists” or something like that. Then on Wikipedia (an ever reliable source), it said that he was a very liberal pope.

How are these two reconciled? A “liberal modernist” sounds like a contradiction.

The only problem is that the understanding of the terminology has changed. During Pius IX’s time, “liberalism” was more or less equivalent to the widest possible extension of human rights as opposed to any kind of dictatorial or authoritarian political regime. It was not the sort of socialistic economic leftism we call “liberalism” today, nor was it the “liberalism” we often hear of in reference to certain Catholics in the Church today.

“Modernism” was a term used at the time to denote a movement among certain churchmen to essentially adapt the Church to societal developments in moral matters. It had nothing to do with “being modern” in the sense of advocating technological advancement or acknowledging what’s good in political developments. Today, we would call it “relativism” instead of “modernism”. “Liberalism” in a Church context today, is also more or less equivalent to “Relativism”.