Customer Reviews

The Church Confronts Modernity: Catholic Intellectuals and the Progressive Era

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Woods' book is an amazing display of erudition and insight in less than 200 pages. For too long, postconciliar Catholics have been led to believe that the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church in America was intellectually barren, reactively hostile to new ideas, and fully deserving of being labelled a "ghetto." Some scholars, such as historian James Hitchcock, had previously revealed problems with that view. But Woods has gone even further in exploring our not-so-distant past. He has systematically and thoroughly examined the American Catholic response to "Progressivism" and philosophical pragmatism in the early 20th Century and found that the response was cogent, coherent, intellectually sound, and orthodox. Not all Progressivist ideas were bad, and some of its "forms" could readily be assimilated, but the essential "matter" was rejected. The Catholic intellectuals of the time (to include the Jesuits at the magazine America) could tell the difference.

After reading this, one may feel that if the Church as a whole had taken a similar approach during the Second Vatican Council, and not simply kowtowed to modernity so much, the Church would not be in such a mess as it is now.

Put simply, this book is gracefully written, thoroughly researched, sober, and balanced--reminiscent of the great Catholic historian Christopher Dawson. Any American Catholic, seeing the disarray of a Church mired in scandal, dissent, and heterodoxy, and interested in the "old days" should pick this book up and read it. If he does, he may find himself asking at the end: "What happened to make it all go so wrong?"

This precisely written, well researched book compares and contrasts Catholic and Progressive intellectual thought during the early 1900's. On some issues, such as organized labor, Catholics and Progressives reached similar conclusions. On others, such as education, they could not have been further apart. On all issues, a great fundamental difference applied: does man exist to serve man, or to serve God? So, although both sides might settle on similar remedies for social problems, their underlying principles were so different that conflict was inevitable. Progressives viewed dogma of any kind as a social nuisance or something to be dispensed with entirely. Catholics naturally held dogma to be fundamental to a well-ordered society. Progressives (generally) viewed man as a servant of the state; Catholics viewed society as the servant of man. Progressives were primarily concerned with the advancement of the state; Catholics with the salvation of the soul. Woods does a thoroughly excellent job of articulating these and other philosophical differences. In doing so, he gives us a remarkably clear picture of that time in America, as well as allowing us to judge how things have progressed--or regressed--on issues like education over this last century.

I have just finished reading THE CHURCH CONFRONTS MODERNITY - Catholic Intellectuals & the Progressive Era by Thomas E. Woods Jr., taking the time to highlight in detail this excellent work for future reference in the fight for the heart and soul of the Church being waged by Catholics who know their faith, as opposed to those who are having it subtly stolen from them. Before I was even a third of the way through the book I had gone through a highlighter, which gives an indication of the importance of what Dr. Woods is saying to what is left of the Catholic world, post the ambiguities of Vatican II, in particular, post the efforts of those who would destroy the Church from within.

To be technically correct, in THE CHURCH CONFRONTS MODERNITY, hereafter referred to as CCM, Woods not only tells it like it is, but how it used to be, and, if the Church is going to survive as a viable institution in serving as the world's repository of Perfect Truth, Who is a Someone, not a something for salvations sake, which is the only reason for the Church's existence, how it must be again. Woods is right to persuasively insist that looking back to how Catholic giants in America confronted the modernists in the progressive era in combating the work of the devil is our only hope of escaping the modern catacombs in order to convert the world to the one true faith, per Christ's admonition to His disciples in the last paragraph of the Gospel of Matthew. THE problem, as Woods so clearly points out, is that "how it used to be," in reference to the Church in America, was orders-of-magnitude better than "how it is now" with the prospects for "how it will be" no better, if the lessons from the past are not learned.

The focus for Woods is on the Catholic intellectual critique of modernity during the period immediately before and after the turn of the twentieth century where defenders of the faith were plentiful because they understood what it meant to be Catholic in more than name only. This is to be contrasted with an institutional Catholic Church today that, for all practical purposes, is unrecognizable as Catholic, as a direct result of the dissenters being given carte blanche to destroy it from within with impunity. Woods is talking about a Progressive Era where Catholics knew their faith well enough to use what good they could find in Progressivism for the greater Glory of God, in particular, the Church that He founded upon the Rock that is Peter. Catholics at the beginning of the twentieth century understood that discipline is one of the highest, if not the highest forms of love, which is something parents must come immediately to grips with; else, they cease to be responsible parents. Similarly, the Church under Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Saint Pius X, understood this seminal Catholic Truth, which is a Someone, not a something. This was directly reflected in orthodox catechesis which helped formed the consciences of a generation of Catholic leaders like Thomas Shields, William Kirby, and Edward Pace, who fought the good fight against the likes of James Dewey, and other representatives of Pragmatism as it played out in ethics, education, and nationalism. These were not the unencumbered autonomous consciences of Kant but rather those of an economic and political philosophy rooted in the natural law as articulated by Catholic giants like Thomas Aquinas, consciences which were informed in accord with the infallible teaching Magisterium of Holy Mother Church on faith and morals, consciences which understood that faith and reason are married, not divorced, with faith enabling a reason, which, in turn, reinforced faith.

Woods in The Church Confronts Modernity describes how decidedly nonpluralistic Catholicism responded to the modernist assault on faith and reason, and, moreover, must continue to respond, to an increasingly hostile pluralistic intellectual environment. Catholicism insisted on the uniqueness of the Church and the need for making value judgments based on what it considered a sound philosophy of humanity.

Woods recognizes that the reason Catholics no longer know their faith is that the prime catechetical tool for teaching it to them, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, has been watered down such that many of the immutable truths of the faith are no longer a part of that sacred liturgy. Woods concurs in his Epilogue that Lex credendi, lex orandi, is more than just a pithy phrase. It is a foundational axiom for survival of the faith.

I highly recommend THE CHURCH CONFRONTS MODERNITY- Catholic Intellectuals & the Progressive Era, by Thomas E. Woods Jr. as a necessary addition to any Catholic library. - Gary L. Morella

It's a shame Columbia University Press, like most university presses, charges so much for its books. But don't let that dissuade you here. This is a brilliant and important book.

In this book, Professor Woods looks at the Catholic Church in America during the first 20 years of the twentieth century, which roughly coincide with the pontificate of St. Pius X. The book gives you an idea of what it was like to be a Catholic before the deluge of dissent and disaster that afflicted us in the '60s. That in itself is something worth doing.

But Woods does much more here. He shows that the pictures people often paint of the pre-conciliar Church are not accurate. It was not opposed to all new ideas, etc. Catholics engaged with the culture, but unlike today they did not permit themselves to be overwhelmed by it. They even said that America needed to be converted to Catholicism - and other forbidden statements no one will ever hear from an American bishop today.

Now bear in mind, this is a demanding book. If you've read Professor Woods' delightful Politically Incorrect Guide to American History and are expecting something similar, think again. This is a serious scholarly work, as its many endorsements in respected historical journals attest.

At the same time, it is intended not only for academics but also for the educated general public. It shows us a Catholic Church in America in which Catholics actually spoke and acted like Catholics - shocking! Professor Woods is to be commended for this brilliant study.

Prof. Thomas Woods wrote an informative book on the steadfastness of the Catholic Church in these United States during the Progressive Era (c. 1880s-1919). The book demonstrates that the Catholic Church authorities confidently faced challenges from such concepts such as Pragmatism, the New Sociology, the New Economics, vague calls for "pluralism", etc.

Prof. Woods examined the "isms" Catholic authorities confronted in the latter part of the 19th. century and during the first half of the 20th. century. The first chapter informs readers of the Catholic confrontation vs. Pragmatism. The Catholic critism of Pragmatism was that this "philosophy" ",,, has no doctrines, save its methods." Prof. Woods did not overstate his case re Pragmatism in that the Pragmatists including William James were not nihilists. The disagreement was with the notion that one ideas or concept was as as good as another except for Catholocism. An unidefined view of life without clarity and moral absolutes was an obvious anathema to Catholicism. Yet, as Prof. Woods carefully explained, Catholic authorities used their long standing traditions, reason, and Scholastic Philosophy to effectively answer the challenge of Pragmatism.

The Catholic authorites also answered the challenge of sociology. Auguste Comte (1798-1857)who is considered the originator of sociology argued that religious creeds were of no avail. Yet, he stated that since religion could not be eradicated, there should be a worship of Humanity with rituals and practises that would be familar. The Catholic authorities did not reject sociology per se. Their arguement was with the inductive method and the collection of data. The Catholic Churchmen always argued against such inductive reasoning and favored deductive reasoning a la Scholastic Philosophy via St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1249). The Catholic authorities also argued that the major problem with modern sociology was that such studies reduced men and women to statistics to be be manipulated by technocrats.

The Catholic authorites had similar criticisms of the New Economics. The Canon Law established limits on economic aquisition and wealth. The basic premises of the Canon Law re contracts and economic activity were based on what the Catholics considered Natural Law or God's law. Again, Catholic authorities did not reject all of the newer economic theorizing. What was rejected, again, was the inductive method as opposed to deductive reasoning. Again, the Catholic intellectuals opposed the use of data and the reduction of people to statistics and factors of production. In fact, the Catholic authorities argued that economic calamities were due to what may be considered to two Cardinal Sins (Greed and Gluntony). Prof. Woods did use these terms which can be inferred from the sources in the book. Mention of Father Jaurez (1544-1618)could have helped explain the Catholic position. Brief mention of the Medieval Canon Law re economic relations could have made a very good book a little better.

The Catholic response to modern "education" (the word education is used very charatibly)was interesting. Prof. Woods made the point that Catholics again per se did not reject new teaching methods. What was condemned was the attempt to eliminate the Classics and Scholastic Philosophy. The emphasis on science, including false concepts of science such as physical exercise, sports subjects, etc. was rejected. Notice how any new college curricula is called a science to get acceptence. Again, the Catholic authorities saw men reduced to usefullness and robots rather than created in God's Image. The new education substituted utility for moral codes, philosophy, and proper living.

The chapter titled "Syncretism" is interesting. The idea that all religions should be reduced to one religion or combined in the name of religous freedom was contradictory. The idea of one religion without moral codes, concepts, liturgy. etc. was opposed by Catholics. The idea of a vague religion was perhaps the most restrictive religion in that it would tolerate no creeds, liturgy, theology,etc. The Catholics wished all men good will and mercy, but they would not abandon their Catholic Faith that had a 2,000 history.

The final chapter titled "Epilogue" dealt where the Catholic Church had been and where it was going. The Catholic authorities and lay people held to their Faith with a sense of confidence and self assurance. Yet, Prof. Woods stated that after Vatican II (1963), the Catholic authorities and laity lost their confidence and their nerve. Prof. Woods states that the Vatican II documents were badly written and vague. This is in contrast to pre-Vatican II councils whereby the Popes and Catholic authorties were clear, concise, and logical in their terse pronouncements. The apparent contradcitions in the Vatican II sources created internal strife in the Catholic Church and showed a loss of clarity and self confidence. Yet, this book was published in 2003 prior to the election of Pope Benedict XVI(2005) who has actively worked to restore the Latin Mass. The Gregorian Chant, to use Prof. Woods' phrase had the pride of place in the Catholic Mass and is now almost forgotten. Yet, within the last few years, the Latin Mass and Gregorian Chant have been restored in some parishes. In other words, there is the possibiltity of the confidence of Progressive Era Catholicism may be return which could not be forseen when Prof. Woods' book was published in 2003.

This book is useful for Catholics for obvious reasons. Furthermore the book is good for those not familar with the philosophical concepts mentioned in this review. Prof. Woods gave readers a fair and clear explanation of these terms. This book again shows Prof. Woods' clear writing style which makes it more accessible. This book is suggested for devout Catholics and students of the Progressive Era History.

Thomas E. Woods Jr. has bequeathed to us a treasure of economic and theological insight in this scholarly, yet readable, book. Dealing with issues such as fractional reserve banking, usury, and the blackhole that is called (oxymoronically) "foreign aid", Woods shows how traditional economic ideas and current trends differ and where the Catholic, interested in the prosperity of all peoples, should come down on the issues.

Woods is deeply respectful of the Catholic Church and her doctrines, but is not unwilling to question her judgment in matters departing from her special charism, namely when she proposes economic practices that actually hinder the principles the Church stands for.

Woods presents a compelling argument for a free market from a Catholic perspective. If you want one from a secualr perspective, Woods' latest book Meltdown is a tour through current history and is also very good (less academic also).

Buy it, enjoy it, and share it!

This book is excellent in both style and content. It is well-written and exact. Dr. Woods does a brilliant job tying his narrative into a more general conversation about important philosophical, political, economic, and educational issues. As a person interested in both Catholic thought and the transition into modernity, this book satisfied two curiosities at once. You may buy this book expecting to learn about Catholic intellectuals during the Progressive Era, and indeed you will. But more than that, you will come away a fuller understanding of the world around you. This book is well worth the price.

"The Church Confronts Modernity" is the made-for-publication version of Thomas E. Woods' doctoral dissertation. In this book, Woods seeks to demonstrate the fundamental opposition between 'modern' thought and Catholic Christianity, and how the Church has tried to fight, or to cope with, the negative effects of modern thought, while admitting and incorporating its positive values, positive largely because they are recent developments of Christian and classical insights.

On p. one, Woods notes that for him, modernity begins with the turn away from objectivity, toward subjectivity, in the thought of Rene Descartes and all his intellectual descendants to the present. But Woods concentrates on the period around the turn of the century, from the 19th to the 20th, after the wholesale condemnations of Pius IX, to the more narrow 'Modernist' crisis of c. 1900.

The book then concentrates on how this duel played out in the United States, but i thought the book could have used a more extended foundation of analysis of european modern thought and its influence on the US, a la The Closing of the American mind by Allan Bloom. Woods effectively shows the deleterious effects of the writings of William James and John Dewey on the Church and American culture. On p. 90, Woods describes how Dewey was surprisingly candid in condemning a Catholic school system as reactionary and inimical to democracy. Woods writes: "To Dewey's insistence that 'the child is for democracy,' Catholics answered 'the child is for God.'

Woods debunks groups such as the Ethical Culture Society, whose mantra was "Deed, not Creed," that there is always a hidden, if denied 'creed' behind the actions of any group.

This book will convince most readers that there is a fundamental chasm between orthodox Christianity and 'orthodox' modern progressivism, despite the fact that both borrow from each other at the margins. The first and most important stage of fighting a culture war is to identify the enemy despite his/her disguises.