, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Before we start, I came across this great flowchart posted by The Radical Catholic on Twitter. It is an elegant representation of the thought process involved in the discernment of Truth.

And now to the business at hand…

As the scales are falling off the eyes of all the observant Faithful, and with at much higher levels and with much greater frequency, your humble blogger has decided to revisit a thread started some months back.

Although that thread was not specifically named, it was presented through a series of Dr. Jordan Peterson videos. In these videos, Dr. Peterson describes the difference between the IDEOLOGICAL movement that became labeled as MODERNISM and the subsequent antithetical IDEOLOGICAL movement that arose as a direct response to MODERNISM, i.e. POST-MODERNISM.

Given the above skeletal framework, we can put some proverbial meat on them bones.

The first piece of meat that needs to be affixed is the understanding of what constitutes MODERNISM. In Catholic terms, MODERNISM is a heresy that arose from what are called the “Enlightenment” “philosophers”, or rather “free thinkers” who rejected OBJECTIVE REALITY. What these folks claimed was that the Aristotelian definition of TRUTH was not correct. Their claim can be summed up as follows: “bringing the mind into conformity with reality (‘adaequatio rei et intellectus’)” was replaced by “an account of truth as bringing thought into line with life (‘adaequatio realis mentis et vitae’)”.

And naturally, since OBJECTIVE TRUTH didn’t matter any longer, and thought was brought into line with life, individual experience was all that mattered. Thus the alerting “of the Catholic world to the heretical doctrine of Vital Immanence and its central role in Modernist thought” by Pope St. Piux X in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis. Here is one great definition of what constitutes Vital Immanence: (see here)

[Vital Immanence] is the wholly psychological process of the human consciousness unfolding itself, which has not the remotest likeness to the presence of a transcendent reality abiding within us. God as transcendent is lost to sight; no room is left for any kind of revelation; God is the permanent possibility of progress, He is ever projected as the ideal in advance of each successive stage of evolution and changes as the advance proceeds. 

While one can easily identify this heresy in that which Francis, the bishop of Rome spouts out on a regular basis, to confine oneself to simply thinking of Francis in terms of a “modernist” or even a “neo-modernist” misses the point.

Francis has moved way beyond MODERNISM.

The reason Francis has move way beyond MODERNISM is that MODERNISM does not provide a mechanism for dealing with unruly peasants subjects. MODERNISM is an ideology whose promulgation depends on subterfuge and errors of omission. It is an emotion based IDEOLOGY that needs a gullible, dumb-ed down audience if it is to be effective.

What works even better is if that targeted audience is crying out in desperation for attention and secretly for help, and therefore has a self interest in promulgating this IDEOLOGY.

IDEOLOGY does follow self interest after all!

But for the well formed, rational, logical and educated Faithful Catholic, MODERNISM doesn’t resonate. The Catholic Faithful see it for what it is, as per Pascendi. So Francis, the bishop of Rome’s “shtick”, in these cases is worthless.

So the question then becomes, what IDEOLOGICAL mechanism is available to Francis in order for him to force his will onto his subjects?

And the answer to that question is POST-MODERNISM.

Below is a good abridged view of the transition made from MODERNISM to POST-MODERNISM: (see more in-depth explanation here)

To the despair of artists and intellectuals, the positive and uplifting worldview fostered through Modernism has become corrupt and oppressive. Riddled with doubt about the continued viability of the notion of progress, the façade of modernism has begun to crack, and conservative forces that have long been opposed to modernism have rushed, wedge–like, into the interstices to fill and expand the space with their own worldview.

So this “unfortunate” turn of events, with the real God of surprises’ fingerprints in full view, forced those despairing artists, intellectuals et al, to turn to a more radical solution. And that solution is what is known as POST-MODERNISM. Here is that passage:

Many now believe that the period defined by the modernist doctrine has come to an end and that we are now in a period of transition into a new period called, for lack of a better term, postmodernism.


Here is Jordan Peterson to explain:

I’m more of a scientist type but, and if I read philosophy, I tend not to read second rate philosophy and so I’ve tried to avoid the post-Modernists to some degree because their incoherency is one of their least of their sins, but they don’t care about that. No, no, you got to understand, it’s Modernists [- to a point] and Enlightenment people, even traditionalists who care about coherency. The post-Modernists don’t believe in coherency, and I’m not making this up. This is part of their philosophy. They don’t believe in logic.

So what do they believe in?

Back to the post-Modern type. Well you know, this was all revealed in painful detail, where even the closed minded ideologue Norman referred to, just couldn’t quite muster up the moral courage to keep beating the same drum. So what they did was instead, being highly intelligent individuals was play a game of sleight of hand and transformed these Marxist pre-suppositions into post-Modernism in the 1970’s.

They sure did.

But what happens when the POST-MODERNIST NARRATIVE goes the way of the MODERNIST NARRATIVES?

Well, you revert back to the underlying IDEOLOGICAL underpinnings of POST-MODERNISM, i.e. Marxism:

So when the post-Modern narrative doesn’t suffice, say, to push forward the idea that Western civilization should be overturned, they just revert back to the overarching Marxism and say: those people are oppressed and that’s a bad thing.

And what is the underlying idea that powers Marxism?

And that’s partly because post-Modernism was influenced by Marxism and that of course because that’s what the Marxist think about any  situation where there is a power status differential. The people at the top are only there because they stole everything from the people at the bottom.

So POST-MODERNISM is nothing more than Marxism in disguise, and the underlying idea behind Marxism is the acquisition of POWER.

And just in case any further corroboration of the above PRE-SUPPOSITION is needed, here is a passage that appeared at the OnePeterFive blog recently. The individual responsible for the quote is non other than the former Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine for the Faith, Card. Gerhard Muller: (see here)

Instead of the Congregation [for Doctrine], the Vatican’s Secretariat of State is now considered to be the most important institution. “Diplomacy and power questions now have priority, that is a wrong crucial development which needs to be corrected.” It should be rather the Christian belief which should be at the center, and the pope should merely be a “servant of salvation.”

Of course they do.

And it is because a POST-MODERNIST cum MARXIST is the bishop of Rome.

As Cardinal Muller just confirmed.