Pope St. Pius X on Progressivism

Vincent J. Curtis

12 October 2015

Thanks to a recent posting on National Review Online, the following tidbit came to my attention:



“It is one of the cleverest devices of the Modernists (as they are commonly and rightly called) to present their doctrines without order and systematic arrangement, in a scattered and disjointed manner, so as to make it appear as if their minds were in doubt or hesitation, whereas in reality they are quite fixed and steadfast,” Pope Pius X observed in 1907 in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (Feeding the Lord’s flock).



What Pope St. Pius X said was made in comparison with Scholasticism, the philosophy founded primarily upon the works of St. Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle.  Scholasticism is highly ordered and systematic, without being a system.  He was criticizing Modernism, what today would be called Progressivism.

The technique of Progressivism in argument is to pull high-sounding principles out of the air, with a view to the conclusion desired.  Because the principle pulled out of the air is not related to any other principle or ordered set of principles, the folly or error it may contain is not obvious.  The cumulative effect is seen in the chop-logic of modern liberalism and progressivism of today.  The chop logic of Political Correctness follows naturally from a lack of systematic reason.

Other examples of the technique of pulling a doctrine or principle out of the air are found in the arguments advanced by President and Mrs Clinton, President Obama and his spokesmen, and unprincipled Democrats and liberals in general.  They will say anything to win the argument in the here and now and when confronted later with their self-contradiction shamelessly argue that that was then and this is now.  There are plenty of Canadian examples also.

The point of this post is to call attention to the employment of some high-sounding principle or other to advance an argument when that principle is not related to a larger, ordered and systematic set of principles.  One needs caution and skepticism when hearing this technique employed.
-30-