I am interested in the question of Modernism. It is a question I think will be the theme of my studies when I start theology next year.

In particular, I would phrase the question in these terms. OK, so we have Pius X's Pascendi. Then we have Cardinal John Henry Newman, and finally George Tyrrell. Newman, ostensibly, was not a modernist; he was in high favor with Rome, and I understand there are plans for his beatification very soon. Tyrrell, however, was a modernist. He was kicked out of the Jesuits, and then out of the Church.

Incidentally, Newman was the inspiration for Tyrrell to convert to Catholicism in the first place. But I'm willing to bet that Tyrrell split from Newman's thought later in life.

Both have theories of doctrinal development. I wonder, what exactly was the line that Tyrrel crossed, and that Newman didn't cross?

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), April 11, 2004

Answers

Bump

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), April 11, 2004.

I would suggest you should focus on measuring all you wish to investigate against Truth rather than relative to whatever and or each other etc...

-modernism itself is a relative term -Truth is timeless; therefore, modernism is by its very nature unTruth and varying degrees of modernism are but unTruth...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), April 12, 2004.

Sure sounds like a negative subject to base one's study of theology. If you are truely starting the study of theology, may I recommend Jesus as the theme?

-bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), April 12, 2004.

Check out the following site, which outlines what lines were crossed with Modernist thought. Hope it helps - I'm studying Tyrrell at the moment and am finding limited resources on the internet. If you visit newadvent.org and look under Modernism in the encyclopedia, there is a wealth of information as to why the Church is opposed to Modernism.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/MODERSM.TXT

-- (mysticangel89@hotmail.com), May 04, 2004.