“The decree of the Commissioner, dated 11 July, 2013 indicates the purpose of the measure taken which is: ‘the goal of preserving and promoting the internal unity of the Institute as well as the fraternal communion, adequate formation to religious and consecrated life, the organization of apostolic activities, and the correct management of temporal goods.’ Five brothers who in the past had occupied positions of high responsibility in the Institute, at the beginning of 2012 sought out dialogue with the Founder and his Council in order to express what in their view were irregularities, beginning with liturgical choices that did not however, exhaust the list of their concerns. Unsatisfied, they then approached the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Doctrine of the Faith. Those who manifest their conscience to an authority, which in this case is the Church headed by the Pope, by this very action itself, prove that they recognize this authority as such, and which therefore excludes any attitude of ‘rebellion’ on their part towards those in power. The Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life recognized extremes and therefore an apostolic visitation began in the second half of that year. Each friar in perpetual vows, as agreed by the General Council then in office, was provided with a questionnaire protected under the secret of one’s conscience.”
But in recent years I have found my relationship to many (not all or even most) traditional Catholics tested and strained. I say “tested” because I have found that if I do not adhere to a rather strict, and I would say “narrow” line, I am relegated to be thrown out of the feast, and there in the “outer darkness” to wail and grind my teeth.
It would seem that for some, I am required to bash bishops, lament that the Church has “never been in worse shape,” and that every single solitary problem in the Church today is “due to Vatican II” and the “Novus Ordo” Mass. Stray too far from this, either by omission or commission, and I am in the hurt locker, the penalty box, and relegated to being no better than one of “them.”
Dr. Tracey Rowland recently spoke at the ”Sacra Liturgia Conference” in Rome to the great approval of those attached the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. But she also made the mistake of suggesting that there are some obstacles to a wider attendance of that form of the liturgy due to problems among those who regularly attend:
And this is the judgment: Because the light is come into the world and men loved darkness rather than the light: for their works were evil. For every one that doth evil hateth the light and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved. But he that doth truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest: because they are done in God.
Pope Francis has been shining a light on issues of conscience and preaching the faith in his daily homilies and applying the Word of God to the lives of his hearers. In a particular he continues to return to the them of docility to the Holy Spirit and discerning the way through the modern world, avoiding the extremes and staying on the path of reform and renewal. Continue reading
H/T New Advent
According to what was mentioned by Bishop Padovano, Francis exhorted him to be careful with the extremisms of certain Traditionalist groups, but also to treasure tradition and allow it to live in the Church along with innovation.
In order to better explain this last point, the Pope would have brought up his own example:
“See? They say that my Master of papal ceremonies [Guido Marini] is of a Traditionalist mold; and many, after my election, have asked me to remove him from his position and replace him. I have answered no, precisely because I myself may treasure his traditional formation, and at the same time he might take advantage of my more emancipated formation.”
—Sandro Magister, quoting Pope Francis
When Pope Benedict XVI reigned, every little “restoration” of traditional elements to the papal liturgy was often trumpeted as yet another momentous step in the restoration of the liturgy for the whole Church. It strikes us as absurd and inconsistent that now that another Pope reigns, “papal example” in the liturgy is suddenly treated in some “conservative” quarters as “irrelevant” and as being of little or no concern, something best ignored and needing no comment. Unfortunately, the restoration of the sacred liturgy can never be built on wishful thinking, or on denial, or on coming up with strange and improbable excuses (sometimes in the name of charity!) to explain away the obvious.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that the restorationist ideas presented consistently by traditionalists are fundamentally opposed to the new liturgy and to Vatican II. Along these lines, “every little ‘restoration’” introduced by Benedict XVI has been interpreted as an act of creeping traditionalism. As rightly pointed out above, such actions have been “trumpeted,” not by the pope, but by the counter-revolutionaries in the interests of their cause. Accordingly, for those who think in this fashion, every liturgical choice of a pope must be assumed to be backed by an agenda, and, therefore, must be exploited for its sign value. What the pope actually intended or did not intend is not important. It is what we can make out of it that counts.
So instead of making an attempt to discern actually what Pope Francis intended or did not intend by his choice, the traditionalists isolate the “offending” action in freeze-frame and use it to sustain the paranoia that is necessary to drive the crusade.
Today in the second reading from the Office of Readings was from sections 4 and 12 of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church from the Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium. It is apropos to the Novena in preparation for Pentecost and provides me with the opportunity to develop ideas I introduced in my last post. There I posited that in the light of the teaching of the postconciliar popes the traditional and charismatic approaches to spirituality should not be considered fundamentally opposed, though much of what goes under the title of both “traditionalism” and “pentecostalism” is problematic.
I believe this is the sense of sections 4 and 12 of Lumen Gentium in which the Council indicates two things: that the Church is equipped and directed by both “hierarchical and charismatic gifts”; that it is “not only through the sacraments and the ministries of the Church that the Holy Spirit sanctifies and leads the people of God and enriches it with virtues, but, “allotting his gifts to everyone according as He wills, He distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank.”
Marcelo Gonzalez is the Argentinian blogger who was the source for Rorate Caeli’s report on the status of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass in Beunos Aires under Cardinal Bergoglio. Dawn Eden pointed, from one of Gonzalez’s articles that he is a Holocaust denier and also called his report on the status of EF under Cardinal Bergoglio a “smear.” A controversy has ensued.
Rorate Caeli has defended the accuracy of Gozalez’s report and seems to be correct that Cardinal Bergoglio provided only one priest for the EF, who celebrated only a “hybrid mass.” Apparently, this was unacceptable to the Latin Mass community and so poorly attended that it was discontinued. But the report of Gozalez, as reproduced by Rorate Caeli, begins thus:
Of all the unthinkable candidates, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is perhaps the worst. Not because he openly professes doctrines against the faith and morals, but because, judging from his work as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, faith and moral seem to have been irrelevant to him.
Dawn Eden has published a further update on the use of the work of Marcelo Gonzalez, a Holocaust denier, by Rorate Caeli to criticize Pope Francis. I have also called out RC for the hypocritical arguments it uses in order to cloak the lack of charity going on over there.
Gonzalez has posted a clarification of his original piece on the Holocaust in order to reply to Dawn’s objections. Dawn’s response is excellent. So is the article to which she links at the bottom by Jeannette Pryor, which describes by way of personal experience the extremes of ideological thinking to which traditionalism can lead. Jeannette’s piece is a must read.
New Catholic at RC claims to be free of ideological thinking, and also claims that I have some kind of personal vendetta against him. That simply is not the case. My problem with Rad Trad propaganda has nothing to do with RC in the first place. It is only that RC has made itself the premier traditionalist blog and is a clearing house for all things Rad Trad, and the same time protects itself from criticism in a “passive-aggressive” manner. (See also this.) Continue reading