The Neo-Catholic Dead-End

Daily Catholic ^ | October 24, 2002 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

[AAABEST]

Interesting read bump.

[livius]

He makes a number of good points. I am also particularly puzzled about this Pope's "cult of personality." I remember the papacy of Pius XII, and while I recall that he was enormously respected, I don't remember so much personal adulation, or even that he was personally visible that much. Granted, I was just in my early teens when he died, so it's possible that my recollections aren't accurate.

But it does seem to me that, aside from the fact that church governance does not seem to be high on his list of things to do, this Pope has also taken a very unusual approach to the Papacy. He has rewritten everything, revised everything (even things such as the Rosary), and left his personal stamp on everything. I think many people, whether they know it or not, find that disturbing, and it may account for some of the heated passions and polarization in Catholic circles nowadays.

[Land of the Irish]

Ping

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

It's regrettable that the Wanderer will argue against Mr Ferrara yet not allow him any space to reply.

Interesting read thanks for posting.

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

It's regrettable that the Wanderer will argue against Mr Ferrara yet not allow him any space to reply.

Interesting read thanks for posting.

[rogator]

"It's regrettable that the Wanderer will argue against Mr Ferrara yet not allow him any space to reply."

It's beyond regrettable. It is downright unconscionable.
Even liberals allow rebuttal.

[St.Chuck]

I remember the papacy of Pius XII, and while I recall that he was enormously respected, I don't remember so much personal adulation, or even that he was personally visible that much.

He wasn't visible. During his nineteen year pontificate he left the Vatican once. John XXIII, in making a trip to Assisi was the first pope since 1870 to actually make a trip. Paul VI was the first pope since the eighteenth century to travel outside of Italy.

[St.Chuck]

Will Mr. woods ever tire of promoting his book?

[Land of the Irish]

Check the date of the article before you chuck your peanut shells from the gallery.

[St.Chuck]

Oh my! It's two years old! LOL. Will Ultima Ratio ever tire of promoting Mr. Woods' book?

[Land of the Irish]

Will you ever tire of promoting the "Spirit of Vatican II"?

[livius]

Thanks for the information.

[pascendi]

You're as far ahead as you ever will be with that comment.

Strategically, now's probably the time to quit.

[St.Chuck]

Will you ever tire of promoting the "Spirit of Vatican II"?

The only thing I promote is filial devotion to the pope.

[St.Chuck]

Thanks for the information.

Yer welcome.

[Land of the Irish]

Thus the "conservative" position has several major failings, all of which we will explore in these pages. The one on which we will focus the most attention is the conservative's dogged insistence on ignoring or explaining away glaring differences between preconciliar and postconciliar practice and ecclesial attitudes, and even common teachings below the level of Catholic dogma. Novelties that were condemned as intolerable threats to the Faith are suddenly recommended as the work of the Holy Ghost. (As we will discuss, while these new practices ecumenism, for instance - are not in themselves strictly matters of Catholic doctrine, in the traditionalist view they tend materially to undermine doctrines to which the Catholic is absolutely bound.) That there is absolutely no parallel for this in all of Church history should go without saying. The conservative position, however, has generally been to accept the novelties without question, regardless of the warnings of previous Popes and of the terrible trials these novelties have visited upon the Church.

The Great Facade

[Land of the Irish]

In sum, neo-Catholics gladly defend and practice a form of Catholicism that would have horrified any Pope before 1960. To appreciate this, one need only imagine Pope St. Pius X attending what today's neo-Catholic would consider a "reverent Novus Ordo Mass," with women, their heads uncovered, serving as "lectors," altar girls assisting the priest and handling the sacred vessels, the priest facing the people over a table, horrendous and doctrinally suspect vernacular translations proclaimed entirely in a loud voice, ecumenically oriented "Eucharistic prayers" that omit every reference to the Mass as propitiatory sacrifice, banal hymns and even pop music, the handshake (or hug) of peace, Communion in the hand, and lay men and women distributing the Sacred Host and Precious Blood to standing communicants. How would St. Pius X react to this spectacle? Obviously, he would react as traditionalists do; and, as Pope, he would order it to cease immediately. But for the neo-Catholic, the same spectacle poses no problem whatever, and in his view of the situation calls only for" obedience" to the ruinous innovations that produced it.

Whether he knows it or not, therefore, the neo-Catholic has broken with Tradition. This is not just a question of the appearance of the Church as a visible commonwealth in her worship and other praxis, but also of novel orientations, attitudes and liberal tendencies never been before seen in Catholics who considered themselves faithful.

A prime example is the "Catholic charismatic renewal," an "ecc1esial movement" of babbling, "Spirit-filled," interdenominational congregations, who gather in sports arenas and other large venues to be thrilled by raucous music and the exhortations of "anointed" preachers, many of them Protestant ministers. The movement is founded on a dearly heterodox pneumatological conception of the Church, which regards the institution of the Catholic Church as but a visible manifestation, however admirable, of a preexistent pan-denominational "union in the Holy Spirit" with objective heretics. This grotesquerie has penetrated nearly every diocese in North America, and is vigorously promoted by the decidedly neoCatholic Franciscan University of Steubenville and Mother Angelica's Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), the media flagship of neo-Catholicism. (That EWTN's strange brew of traditional devotions and appalling novelties is considered rock-solid Catholicism today only indicates the depth of the current crisis.)

The Great Facade

[sinkspur]

To appreciate this, one need only imagine Pope St. Pius X attending what today's neo-Catholic would consider a "reverent Novus Ordo Mass,"

Pius X would likely have been horrified at the manner of celebration of the Eucharist by the apostles and the Early Church.

So what?

[Land of the Irish]

When the German Protestant Martin Bucer suggested that English Protestants introduce the practice of Communion in the hand, he did so because, as he said at the time, this novel practice would undermine two Catholic teachings at once: the priesthood and the Real Presence. Allowing the faithful to receive the Eucharist in their the hands would tend to establish the belief that the Host was nothing more than ordinary bread (so indeed why shouldn't the faithful be able to touch it?) and that there was nothing special or unique about the priest that should entitle him alone to handle the sacred species. Bucer knew full well what he was doing.

We can also indict the "conservative" position for having utterly failed to stem the revolutionary tide of the past thirtyfive years. Its approach simply has not worked. The Left has proceeded with determination and severity in its forcible introduction of novel practices throughout the life of the postconciliar Church, including but not limited to the liturgy. The so-called conservatives, on the other the hand, made concession after concession to these vandals, claiming that since these changes were not to dogma per se, they were not worth fighting over. The Left was sure of itself; the Right hedged. The result should have surprised no one.

The Great Facade