The Neo-Catholic Dead-End

Catholic Family News ^ | October 2002 | Thomas E. Woods

[Land of the Irish]

and he has publicly prayed, "May St. John the Baptist protect Islam."

I was not aware that the Pope invoked this prayer. During normal times, I would have been shocked.

But not now.

[Land of the Irish]

St. John the Baptist suffered martyrdom for Jesus Christ, and the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church that He established, the Roman Catholic Church. Islam did not even exist at the time of this holy saint's early death.

Why in the heck, should this blessed martyr be invoked to protect a false religion that rejects the Divinity of Jesus?

[sinkspur]

Trads are the most thin-skinned people on the face of the earth! They can't allow one single criticism to go unanswered, and they answer it with a 2,000 word essay.

Plus, most people with PhDs don't go around appending it to every single signature.

We're not impressed that Woods has a PhD; he's still a kook.

[Land of the Irish]

he's still a kook.

And so are you.

[sinkspur]

And so are you.

I don't write 2,000 word diatribes against The Wanderer, labelling it a "neo-Catholic" publication.

This article shows just how far out Woods, and Drolesky and Ferrara are.

The Wanderer is "progressive"?

Puleeze!

[Land of the Irish]

The Wanderer is "progressive"?

Yes.

Is the Wanderer a "neo-Catholic" publication?

Yes.

Paul Likoudis and James Drummey were the straws that broke this camel's back.

After 10 years of subscribtion, I cancelled mine this past spring.

[sinkspur]

The Wanderer is "progressive"?

Yes

That's the funniest damn thing I've read all day!

[ultima ratio]

Thin-skinned? Is that why the Wanderer won't publish a trad's self-defense? Neo-Catholics are the ones who like to dish it out, but can't take criticism themselves. And by the way, I notice you don't deal with the content of the article, but immediately go personal. That too is very typical.

[Land of the Irish]

That's the funniest damn thing I've read all day!.

I agree wholeheartedly, the Wanderer is total joke. Do you subscribe to Mad Magazine, also?

[sinkspur]

Is that why the Wanderer won't publish a trad's self-defense?

They don't have fifteen extra pages to publish a treatise.

And by the way, I notice you don't deal with the content of the article, but immediately go personal.

The article is the same old trad bull: Vatican II bad, John XXIII, Paul VI and JPII bad, and lots of other inside baseball that ordinary Catholics could care less about.

If you guys and The Wanderer want to beat the hell out of each other, be my guest.

[Loyalist]

Having followed Stephen Hand's leftward drift over the past few years, I would not be surprised to see him end up writing for National Catholic Reporter and speaking at Call to Action rallies in another few years.

[narses]

Hand, by the way, after coming out in favor of optional celibacy in the priesthood, is now defending the bizarre ceremonies that accompanied the opening of Cardinal Mahony's alleged cathedral in Los Angeles. His only criticism was that "the poor" were not given ample opportunity to attend, though some of us suspect that this was a sign of God's mercy toward the poor.

Very funny!

Having followed Stephen Hand's leftward drift over the past few years, I would not be surprised to see him end up writing for National Catholic Reporter and speaking at Call to Action rallies in another few years.

He's been banned from this site more than once.

[Polycarp]

A priest respected by a great many traditionalists recently revealed to me what he thinks is behind the increasing hysteria and irrationality of recent neo-Catholic commentary. It's pride, he says. It is increasingly obvious that we have been right all along, and they wrong-----dramatically and catastrophically so. But it is difficult for them to admit this to themselves.

Obviously, neither side has a monopoly on either pride or Truth.

There is plenty of blame to go around on both sides.

And the labels of integrist and/or schismatic freely thrown on one side, as well as neo-Catholic (as well as other even less flattering labels) on the other, do not lead to a discovery of Truth or reveal evidence of the Christian virtue of humility by any party involved.

Nota bene:Lately in these Tridentine versus NO/ preconciliar versus post conciliar debates I do not often make objective statements on who is right and who is wrong.

Only time will settle that score, IMHO.

But the chief players on both sides of this Tridentine versus NO/ preconciliar versus post conciliar debate are often pompous prideful condescending and arrogant asses.

This combination of virtues rarely leads to consensus, let alone conversersion of soul.

The Salvation of souls is at stake.

Too many have let the primary objective become the protection of their reputation and ego and their agenda, not the salvation of souls.

The ultimate winner shall be those who serve not an agenda nor foolish personal pride but Christ and His Bride.

[narses]

What does God want of us? What is His Will? I almost stopped posting here because I could not see how it conformed to His Will. I do now the little I do to learn and to help others learn, but I wonder, is it my ego or His Will?

[Loyalist]

I wonder sometimes if I'm doing Him, myself, or anyone else, any good by posting here too.

[Polycarp]

Read the last hundred posts (#'s 200's to 300's) of this thread: (All Faiths and Lurkers) How many have changed to another faith by talking on this forum? ^

Obviously, there have been conversions from Internet apologetics to the True Church. Even here. I know several of them personally from ongoing long personal communications.

We need to take these internecine battles offline here! This is not just Catholics hashing out theological differences! This is an open forum where folks from all walks of religion meet and exchange ideas. We Catholics need to provide a united front to this challenge.

This ongoing warfare between Trads and neo's destroys any semblance of unity in our witness to others and attempts to evangelize and win souls to Christ!!!

Free Republic is not the place for such a battle. Take it elsewhere, like a site devoted simply to Catholic discussion.

There should be Catholic apologetics here, on a unified, charitable, humble, and patient level (boy have I failed lately!) but NOT internecine warfare and sniping.

The sources of today's crisis must to be hashed out. I'm a realist. I realize fully that the Church is terribly sick and wounded and that there are competing and often diametrically opposed theories for the root causes of this malaise.

But it should not be debated here! Not on a public Forum like this.

The infighting here in public view is scandalous, and DOES JUST AS MUCH TO PREVENT CONVERSION as the priestly crimes and malfeasance of the hierarchy.

If one's primary purpose here is to serve Christ and His Bride, one will cease this internecine warfare here and help present a united front to the world, and choose a more appropriate medium to hash out and solve the problems amongst ourselves.

[ultima ratio]

Yes, there are souls at stake. But Christ gave us a means to discern the true from the false. He said there would be wolves among us dressed as sheep. We were to know them by their fruits. This has been a surprisingly disappointing and spiritually empty papacy. I ask you: what have been the fruits of the past twenty, thirty, forty years? Just give me a few positives, something to think about. What are the fruits--in vocations, in theology, in culture, in worldly prestige, in sanctity? Even our canonizations are questionable now.

[St.Chuck]

Writer Paul Likoudis, in his "From the Mail" column...

I always thought that Mr. Matt was responsible for "From the Mail." Is it really Likoudis?

[Polycarp]

Having followed Stephen Hand's leftward drift over the past few years, I would not be surprised to see him end up writing for National Catholic Reporter and speaking at Call to Action rallies in another few years.

Its tempting, given my past history with him, to agree.

But I think Hand will settle down soon into a reliable apologist and not go too far left.

He has a lot to offer the Church.

So do many of his enemies.

A General Indult would do wonders to bring some calm and clarity into these muddy and turbulenbt waters, and would take the wind out of the sails of both sides.

And its not a question of if but when.

The Holy Spirit is still in charge here, folks. Sanity will return, just not as soon as we'd like.

The damages done in the name of the spirit of V II will be reversed, but at a time when those who were involved will not lose face. It will happen as the celebrities of the immediate post conciliar scene pass from the current scene. It will definitely happen, within 2-3 generations.

And within those 2-3 generations, the NO will cease to exist as its evolved since V II and the only mass left will more closely resemble the 1962 missal than the Pauline Rite we know now.

IMHO.