1. Note how modernists deny doctrine by tweaking the mode in which it is affirmed:
- Of course the soul lives on! — in our memories.
- Of course Jesus rose from the grave! — in the transformation of the disciples' understanding of his mission.
- Of course the sacraments are transformative! — since they are communal celebrations of important life moments.
- Of course there are miracles! — every experience of love and sharing is a miracle.
- Of course God exists! — as the perpetual desire we all have for transcendence and community.
- Of course I am orthodox! — according to the evolving expressions and ideas by which the Church promotes the ideals of service and community.
2. Here we have the creed of the most banal materialist dressed up in the language of Catholicism. In other words: the soul does not live on, Christ never rose, the sacraments are not effective, there are no miracles, and God does not exist. One wonders why they put so much effort into posturing.
3. Notice also that the nullification of doctrine is often accomplished by sentimentalizing it. By equating the supernatural with the emotional, we become straightforward philosophical naturalists.
5. Cardinal Burke made a comparison a month or two back between unrepentant sodomites (or was it adulterers? I don't remember) and unrepentant homicides. The logic of the comparison was completely sound, and did not indicate any malice toward sodomites or toward homicides (yes, even murderers should be shown love and mercy). But in the progressive catholic press there was outrage over the comparison. The outrage wasn't based on anything reasonable, though: it was based on Burke's lack of sensitivity, his homophobic rhetoric, etc. In short, no one (so far as I saw) touched the logic of what he said, but they did a very effective job of making the man out to be a malicious bigot, when he was merely expressing Catholic doctrine. This is an easy example of the way sentimentalism ("how could you be so *unfeeling*?!") functions to thwart reason.