Skip to comments.A word to biters of the consecrated hand [Catholic Caucus]
Posted on 07/10/2008 1:44:51 PM PDT by NYer
A friend just phoned to tell me about a discussion on a "trad" forum.
I went there and read for a while.
In this discussion some people were publicly bad mouthing priests who have been celebrating the TLM and denigrating their ministry.
They claim these priests not Catholic enough, not fully or really Catholic. Not Catholic like they are.
Thus, they who have no authority in the Church, laymen who have no jurisdiction, no credentials other than that they are hobbyists of the older form of the Roman Rite (sincere as their devotion may be), they who have read some encyclicals of popes of yesteryear, some books by authors zealous for Tradition, they who have no authority other than their conviction that no one else can be right or as Catholic as they are, turn with a snarl and bite the consecrated hand that feeds them Christ’s Body and forgives their sins.
And this about some priests who have probably already forgotten more about liturgy and theology than they will ever know. Priests who have suffered a great deal in their years of ministry at the hands even of Church officials because of their traditional convictions.
I am at an annual gathering of priests right now. We have among other things discussed what it is like to minister to people who then turn on you. How to work with that, with them.
Most of the time we are willing to have you keep bashing us, try to ruin our reputations, running us down.
But it does take its toll.
I say, if you chose to stay on this path, woe to you who raise your hands against the Lord’s anointed.
In taking this negative approach with and about your priests, you will not obtain your objectives.
Don’t expect them to be all warm and open to your suggestions when you do nothing but get in their faces and run them down behind their backs.
Mark my words, folks.
If any of you have imbibed of this attitude, what I am describing above… mark my words, you are on a spiritually perilous course.
You are putting your souls in danger of hell and causing scandal to others.
You could also wind up ruining everything for others who also have your aspirations, but not your lack of prudence.
Father is not referring to this forum but some of you are probably familiar with the more traditionalist minded forums. My point in posting this here is to serve as a reminder to all of us to show the respect these consecrated priests deserve.
I visit Fr. Z’s blog and post there under CTrent1564 as well. I don’t know what Trad forums he is talking about in particular, but one can conjecture that it is the more SSPX types who lean to TLM and nothing is ever good for them. So priests who want to celebrate the ordinary form of the Roman Rite (Missal of 1970) and the Classic form of the Roman Rite (Extraordinary Form using Missal of 1962), get ripped by “some of these” SSPX types are those who act more Catholic than the Pope and call the Ordinary form of the Roman Rite invalid.
When the Transalpine Redemptorist had thir canonical status recognized by Rome, many SSPX supporters appered on many orthodox Catholic blogs critisizing them.
What a shame?
I’m nots sure I understand. If people are attacking priests who celebrate the TLM, why are traditionalists being blames?
No, it’s not written clearly, but I think he must be referring to things like a couple of instances reported on his blog shortly after the MP came out — a priest went to the trouble of learning or relearning the TLM to accommodate a group that wanted it . . . and then got reamed out by them for every little slip. Fr. Z kept pointing out that such an ungracious attitude (I guess not that uncommon) isn’t helping their cause.
When the Campos, Brazil, group regularized their relations with the Holy Father, a relative of mine called them traitors.
I asked this relative, “Traitors to whom?”
After all, they had sought and attained everything they wanted, including keeping the Old Rites, the schools, and their Superior named as Auxilary Bishop, with the assurance that he would be THE bishop when the other stepped down.
The were now in full communion with Rome.
He refused to answer and changed the discussion.
They are only prepared to make certain points in a conversation, but cannot carry on an actual discussion.
Whenever they are invited to family religious functions, they stand outside the Church, audibly praying for the conversion of everyone inside.
How sad, she said redundantly. My parents are Protestant, but they've been to our Baptisms and First Communions and never say an impolite word.
When the children visit them in Florida, I've always told them to go to North Lake Presbyterian with Mom, sing the songs, say the prayers, and say, "Niceta meetcha" to all the nice old people. Just don't receive communion, if it's a communion Sunday for them, because we're not members of that church.
The last time my two oldest sons visited, Mom *volunteered* to take them to the local Catholic parish on Saturday night, and then went to the Sunday Presbyterian service by herself.
You and your family are behaving charitably towards each other, and it will probably bear good fruit in the end.
They thought we were nuts when we joined the Catholic Church, but now that they have more grandchildren than any of their friends, they see at least one of the benefits! I think it helps that I’ve always made it clear that I’m grateful for my upbringing in the Presbyterian church, even though I’ve chosen something different in adulthood. If we’d said that our children couldn’t attend church with Mom because it’s BAAAAAAD, my parents would naturally have been very offended.
I’ve seen some reports about the Campos traditional community, and it seems just great. I’m really happy for them.
I agree with you-on both counts.
I sure haven’t run into much of this myself.
My own perspective is to be thrilled when any priest begins to offer the TLM.
If it is offered in good faith and with a sincere attempt to follow the rubrics, I can’t see where any criticism is ever due.
All things involving a human have some room for improvement.
“ a priest went to the trouble of learning or relearning the TLM to accommodate a group that wanted it . . . and then got reamed out by them for every little slip.”
If we had a TLM in Idaho, I’d feel very fortunate, even if the priest’s Latin were less than perfect — not that I’d be likely to notice, anyway.
There’s a brand new church in Fruitland. Dropped by the other day, and — gasp, stagger, faint — the priest was actually there and available.
On the other hand, this bishop is still reinstating molesters to be parish priests.
I am guessing at the circumstances here but I believe I know the website in question and Fr. Z. does indeed have a point. For some (rad) traditionalists, it’s polemic after polemic, etc ad nauseam
Idaho Falls, Post Falls, New Plymouth (near you)? Maybe not all current.
that is how Christians should be.
I think so. Do each of us think the other believes some things that are erroneous? Sure. Does that mean denominational differences are more important than family? No way. If it’s a sin to let the children attend a Protestant service one time, instead of insisting that someone take them to Mass, then I’ll do penance for it, because it’s my decision.
2475 Christ's disciples have "put on the new man, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness."273 By "putting away falsehood," they are to "put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander."274
2476 False witness and perjury. When it is made publicly, a statement contrary to the truth takes on a particular gravity. In court it becomes false witness.275 When it is under oath, it is perjury. Acts such as these contribute to condemnation of the innocent, exoneration of the guilty, or the increased punishment of the accused.276 They gravely compromise the exercise of justice and the fairness of judicial decisions.
2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.277 He becomes guilty:
- of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
- of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another's faults and failings to persons who did not know them;278
- of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor's thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another's statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. and if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.279
2479 Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one's neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of justice and charity.
2480 Every word or attitude is forbidden which by flattery, adulation, or complaisance encourages and confirms another in malicious acts and perverse conduct. Adulation is a grave fault if it makes one an accomplice in another's vices or grave sins. Neither the desire to be of service nor friendship justifies duplicitous speech. Adulation is a venial sin when it only seeks to be agreeable, to avoid evil, to meet a need, or to obtain legitimate advantages.
2481 Boasting or bragging is an offense against truth. So is irony aimed at disparaging someone by maliciously caricaturing some aspect of his behavior.
2487 Every offense committed against justice and truth entails the duty of reparation, even if its author has been forgiven. When it is impossible publicly to make reparation for a wrong, it must be made secretly. If someone who has suffered harm cannot be directly compensated, he must be given moral satisfaction in the name of charity. This duty of reparation also concerns offenses against another's reputation. This reparation, moral and sometimes material, must be evaluated in terms of the extent of the damage inflicted. It obliges in conscience.
The thoughts Fr. Z. gives, though not directly aimed at Catholic FReepers, should be VERY carefully heeded by all of us, myself included (especially). I am not advocating turning a blind eye to what goes on...but HOW are we not turning a blind eye? Are we doing so in a prayerful attitude for the bishops and priests concerned...or are we doing so in a Pharisitical, judgemental fashion?
Needless to say, that post on WDTPRS was a blast of cold water in my face....
Yes, it's that website, and some posters were being very uncharitable..I feel sad that a lot of the posters there are so full of anger. Most of them seem very unhappy. I don't think it would win anyone to their particular flavor of Catholicism.
No matter what Rome, or the Church does, it's never good enough. They remind me of my German Aunts.
It sounds like these people are like the Pharisees-—Holier than thou on the outside, completely missing the point of the Mass (unity in Christ) and the faith in general while they nitpick over the tiny details of the ceremony.