The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition. Thus we have two great types -- the advanced person who rushes us into ruin, and the retrospective person who admires the ruins. He admires them especially by moonlight, not to say moonshine. Each new blunder of the progressive or prig becomes instantly a legend of immemorial antiquity for the snob.
Secondly, a quote by Pope Francis at the end of the Synod.
......And since it is a journey of human beings, with the consolations there were also moments of desolation, of tensions and temptations, of which a few possibilities could be mentioned:- One, a temptation to hostile inflexibility, that is, wanting to close oneself within the written word, (the letter) and not allowing oneself to be surprised by God, by the God of surprises, (the spirit); within the law, within the certitude of what we know and not of what we still need to learn and to achieve. From the time of Christ, it is the temptation of the zealous, of the scrupulous, of the solicitous and of the so-called – today – “traditionalists” and also of the intellectuals.
- The temptation to a destructive tendency to goodness [it. buonismo], that in the name of a deceptive mercy binds the wounds without first curing them and treating them; that treats the symptoms and not the causes and the roots. It is the temptation of the “do-gooders,” of the fearful, and also of the so-called “progressives and liberals.”
Francis, pretty much sums up what I feels ails the Catholic Church at the moment and why it is currently withering. On one hand, there is a strong Traditionalist faction which permits no innovation even within the spirit of pre-existing doctrine, on the other, another faction which innovates stupidly to the Church's destruction.
10 comments:
Somewhat on point:
http://takimag.com/article/the_price_of_papal_popularity_patrick_buchanan#axzz3Gn9qoc7i
The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
But not the business of Traditionals. Their focus is to build gates..from within which they can offer fresh troops to the weary battlefield.
What drives me nuts about guys like the Pope is the lack of masculine leadership. Everyone has a bleeding heart nowadays. Everyone is sorry for people caught up in the mess. But nobody - not even the pope now - is willing to stand up and call a spade a spade anymore. To own the problem, to attempt to rebuild the institutions that keep the mess contained. No, that is left to the Traditional folk, whom get zero support from the institutional Church. All the clergy ever wishes to do is milk those families, while offering zero moral support.
I doubt bishops and popes would be so blithe if it was their own ox that was gored. We saw this in the Scandal. The weak were thrown underfoot for to protect the powerful. That's how I see this pope's approach to the social problems. No acknowledgement of needed cultural change, only hand-waving and liberal capitulation. It never works. Look at the Anglicans. Lutherans. Negotiation with liberals and modernity always fails. Always.
mdavid.
The traditionalist interpretation for the collapse of the Church is that the faithful have gone bad and all that the Church needs to do is double down on traditional doctrine and all will be right.
I used to think like this for years. Now I don't.
One of the problems with Traditionalism is that ANY CHANGE or development of Church doctrine is seen as giving in. Hence no change is permitted no matter how much the world changes. Furthermore, the Traditionalist position presupposes that it has a complete understanding of the faith and has totally grasped the mind of God. Traditionalists will always argue that this is not the case but just try getting them to alter anything.
The Protestant religion's midwife was the Catholic church. The Catholic church, by failing to respond in a timely manner to some of the abuses occurring in it fostered the birth of it. It was only after the horse had bolted did the council of Trent finally clear up the mess of in the Church.
The point of this is that many of complaints of the Protestants were thus legitimate. Furthermore, beneficial changes to the Church can sometimes occur through factors external to it.
Take the recent Paedophile scandals. The Church has basically tolerated this disgraceful practice and in many instances turned a blind eye. Paradoxically, it is the civil authorities who are purging the Church of this evil, since it seems to be incapable of sorting this issue on its own.
As I get older, I become more convinced that rupture that occured after Humane Vitae may be no as result of a simple rebellion of the faithful, but perhaps may be indicative of something more profoundly wrong with the Church. As I've said before, everyone imagines the Devil a libertine, no one every imagines him as a Puritan.
@mdavid
As I get older, I become more convinced that rupture that occured after Humane Vitae may be no as result of a simple rebellion of the faithful, but perhaps may be indicative of something more profoundly wrong with the Church. As I've said before, everyone imagines the Devil a libertine, no one every imagines him as a Puritan.
Should be
As I get older, I become more convinced that rupture that occurred after Humane Vitae may be not be the result of a simple rebellion by the faithful, but perhaps may be indicative of something more profoundly wrong with the Church. As I've said before, everyone imagines the Devil a libertine, no one every imagines him as a puritan.
SP,
The Church merely reports on what is true. One can accept said truth, or perish. Just don't blame the Church, she's merely the messenger.
Call God's creation "traditionalist" if you like, but really it's just evolutionary horse sense. Life is hard. Virtue lives. Vice dies. The Church teaches. Darwin judges. QED.
I guess I find your dislike of HV to be more amusing than anything else. News Flash: The West Is Going Extinct. Why? Because so many "highly educated" Westerners think just like yourself. And ideas have consequences. It is now probably less than 300 years before the West is irrelevant and replaced with others.
My word, out of all the possible moral teachings to question, HV is the most undeniable. Only the highly educated and wealthy have the audacity to pretend otherwise. And yes it's everyone's God given free will to reject it, but please, please don't blame the Church for trying to save some of us. She is merely the messenger and there are so few left who speak this unpopular truth.
@mdavid
The Church merely reports on what is true. One can accept said truth, or perish. Just don't blame the Church, she's merely the messenger.
Unless the Church makes an infallible statement, whatever it reports or teaches always contains the possibility of some degree of error or lack of understanding with regard to the faith. Take Usury for example. For years, it condemned, punished and censured those who charged interest on loans. It was only after a millennia and half of preaching against it, that the Church finally recognised its error in understanding of what constituted usury.
HV conflicts with revelation as revealed by physical nature. The insistence that every sexual act must be open to the transmission of life is contradicted by the will of the Creator, who has made it impossible for life to be transmitted during certain phases of a female menstrual cycle. HV's error is not principally in its prohibition of contraception but in its understanding of the nature of the conjugal act.
It is the job of Traditionalists to recognize and preserve what has already been discovered so that one may recognize truly when one has indeed run into something new, which does occasionally exist under the sun, and demands a response based on what it is, not what you think or imagine it should be.
The church as a whole, both Catholic and Protestant, mainly seems to have done this on race and nationality over anything else-having made no official statement on the necessity of races and nations to protect themselves when it was taken as a matter of course by all civilized people, they never defended their own when uncivilized people overran them, as in the Byzantine empire.
As faith without works is dead, so talent and power without responsibility is useless.
Usury for example. For years, it condemned, punished and censured those who charged interest on loans. It was only after a millennia and half of preaching against it, that the Church finally recognised its error in understanding of what constituted usury.
Usury (properly defined) is not and has never been allowed. The morality of interest itself is cultural; if the culture has enough wealth it may be fine. The Church works through this case-by-case. But the fundamental concept of usury itself hasn't changed.
Regarding HV: like usury, the fundamental view has not changed from before the document. Things like NFP were grudgingly allowed as long as they don't contradict the seeking of life. But they aren't really even important. Like usury, motive matters here.
Regarding this obsession with the Church changing HV doctrine: I am still chuckling. You are very convinced you know the truth and the Church does not. Fine, call your view "truth". But your view will be forgotten by default as the world continues to be populated by those aghast at your even asking the questions. They still can't figure out why HV was even written, let alone why your amendments should be.
I certainly don't deny your God-given right to contrive moral reasons to avoid the curse of children. Just please don't ask the Church to join you; I never got fully through HV since I couldn't see the point for 99.9% of humanity in wealthy countries. And I'd rather go play with my kids and then think about how I can help grandchildren if blessed with any.
@mdavid
Usury (properly defined) is not and has never been allowed
And your point is? Where exactly have I said that the Church has permitted Usury? Quotes please. No seriously, before we go on any further with this where do I actually say the Church now permits Usury? It does get so tiresome responding to people who fail to even try to understand what I say but instead debate me on self-imagined interpretations of my motives and arguments.
Things like NFP were grudgingly allowed as long as they don't contradict the seeking of life.
Why is it grudgingly allowed if it is morally permitted by God? Does the Church put burdens on people that God himself does not expect? Was the Church doing God's will before it approved of NFP? If not, why not? Why was the Church off base with God's intentionality?
Liberalism is an easily identified evil in the Church but religious puritanism, masked as holiness, is far harder to combat. What if the "holy" crowd are more severe on themselves than God expects them to be? The "grudging acceptance" of NFP should be a pause for serious reflection on the relationship between God's intention and the Church's understanding of it. Remember, it wasn't the tax collectors that put Christ to death, it was the he Pharisees, those who were well versed in the Law.
I never got fully through HV since I couldn't see the point for 99.9% of humanity in wealthy countries.
One thing that continually amazes me is people's total lack of empathy for others.
I'm rooting for the "progressive" Catholics, but only because I want to see the Catholic Church fall.
Post a Comment