Abbey-Roads2

Good for some, bad for others. 

So the Motu Propio is expected to be released July 7, 2007 - not to eclipse the Live Earth Concerts, to be sure.  Yet it will be like Christmas in July for some long suffering souls.  Whatever will the Traddies-in-waiting blog about after it’s release?  And what does it all mean?  To use the expression visionaries answer when asked if Our Lady’s warnings are good or bad; “It will be good for some, bad for others.”  Answering the question, what will everyone gossip about now?  One word; “plenty”.

Forgetting about those who are concerned the Novus Ordo will be forced into oblivion - that won’t happen; or the Bishops who fear they won’t have control over the liturgy - they always will; there are a myriad of Traditionalists who will have plenty to discuss and keep the liturgical debate hot and heavy.  The discussions, anticipation, impatience, speculations, and everything else that has been tossed around for all this time, aside from making some people look stupid, always comes down to this:  Wait and read the document and remain obedient to your Bishop.

The kalaidesope of Traditionalism. 

I’m not here to write about the MP.  My purpose here is to offer a glimpse into the labyrinth of Catholic Traditionalism - it isn’t an exhaustive list to be sure - just listing a few of the principal groups.  Although some Trads, like angels, are a species unto themselves.

The List:

Traditional Catholics:  The majority accept the Novus Ordo as a valid Mass, and will attend if they have to do so, but they prefer the Tridentine rite Mass and sacraments, etc..  Among this group are people who are highly suspicious of Vatican II, though accepting it, some remain dubious it was an infallible Council - the arguments are many and varied - however, they definitely accept the current reigning Pontiff and hierarchy as legitimate.   Some harbor reservations that the reforms of Vatican II led to the abuse and crises in the Church as regards liturgy and vocation issues.  A few resent the reforms and revisions to the Roman Missal under Pius XII and John XXIII as well.  All in all, they are perfectly good, balanced Catholics, in complete conformity with the teachings of the Church and perfectly obedient to their Bishops.

Rad-Trad:  This group often out and out refuse to accept the changes “perpetrated” by Vatican II, especially as regards the Mass, although they remain obedient to their Bishops and the Pope.  Many tend to regard all the reforms of Vatican II as the triumph of Modernism, so vehemently condemned by previous Popes, most notably Pius X.  They pretty much hold suspect much of the theological thought after 1960.  (I sure can’t hold that against them.)  These faithful souls would be some of the last people on earth willing to support the canonization of John Paul II, who definitely was not “great” in their eyes.  They remain, to be sure, faithful and devout Catholics nonetheless.

Feeneyites:  This is a complex division - overlooking the fact they carry a lot of baggage, within this group you can have all sorts of Trads, yet the one outstanding characteristic of Feeneyism is their tenacious hold onto the literal understanding of Catholic teaching;”There is no salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church” - no if’s, and’s, or but’s.  Feeney was excommunicated by Pius XII, but the excommunication was lifted shortly before he died by Paul VI.  (I wonder if it was the real Paul VI?)  Anyway, Feeney was known to be extremely antisemitic, yet his followers sometimes will dispute that.  The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary are Feeneyites.  Feeneyites profess fidelity to the current reigning Pontiff and are in good standing within the Roman Catholic Church.

The groups briefly described above all enjoy union with the Roman Catholic Church and remain in good standing with the hierarchy.  Many, many good people consider themselves Traditionalists, and seem to be very holy people.  Their conscientious fidelity to the perennial teachings of the Church and Her tradition is invaluable to the body of Christ.  Within the Traditional movement, as I mentioned, exist a variety of personal beliefs which really cannot be sufficiently categorized by these brief generalizations.

Schismatics.

I won’t deal with these, except to list a couple of the groups briefly:

Sedevacantists:  The Chair of Peter is empty - Benedict is not a true Pope, no one has been since Pius XII.  This group, hardly unified, can be broken down into various sub-groups, too numerous to mention.  Within this classification are many dueling factions - it’s a mess - sometimes brilliant people, as well as arguments - but watch out!

Lefebvrism:  This is the SSPX-ers who are/are not in schism, depending which way the wind blows.  Some suspect the Motu Proprio was to placate them.  Not so much.  It would take a lot to make them happy, after all, most of them are more Catholic than the Pope.  That is a tough one to beat.

This has simply been my offering of a glimpse into the Trad Labyrinth - as I understand it - which is a complicated garden of Roman Catholicism - very beautiful indeed, but not all of the paths lead to Rome.  In itself, The Motu Proprio will do little to unify these groups, and please note,  I haven’t even included the progressivists on the other side of this divide - but that is because I consider myself to be a traditional Roman Catholic.  (And yet I like a well celebrated Novus Ordo Mass - go figure.)  

Standing during the Consecration.  (A serious post.)

Where did this come from?  (I really do know!)  But I don’t like it, I always kneel - the rubrics instruct us to do so.  I found a document wherein Fr. Joseph Fessio addressed this issue:

“It is not an insignificant detail. That is why the Church regulates the
posture as well as the words of liturgical celebrations. In this case, the rubric in force is from the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM). no. 21, requiring that people

“should kneel at the Consecration unless prevented by lack of space, large numbers, or other reasonable cause.”

This is the norm—and has been since at least 1201 A.D.—in the Roman Rite. The bishops of the United States of America asked for and received approval from Rome for the congregation to remain kneeling throughout the Canon of the Mass (from the end of the <Sanctus> through the Great Amen) and from the <Agnus Dei> until the
Postcommunion prayer. This remains the norm in the U.S. In fact, in June of 1995 at their annual summer meeting, the U.S. bishops rejected a proposal that kneeling at this time should be optional rather than mandatory.” - EWTN Library

Nevertheless, liturgists like to make up their own rules - read this from the bulletin Fessio is commenting on: 

“It has to do with the slow recovery of the importance of the eucharistic prayer in the Mass. We are talking about the prayer that begins with “The Lord be with you,” “Lift up your hearts” and ends with the Great Amen. This is one prayer. It has an integrity of its own; and it is important not to single out one moment or part (such as the moment or words of consecration) as more important than the rest. To underline that integrity it is best to take the same bodily posture during the entire prayer. The eucharistic prayer is basically a prayer of praise and thanksgiving (even if it includes an intercessory part), and as a prayer of praise and thanksgiving it calls for the bodily posture of standing.

Moreover it is a communal prayer, a prayer of the community even if it is proclaimed by the presider. As a communal prayer it calls for all to take the same bodily posture.

At the heart of the sacrament of unity (which the eucharist is) we would not want to be doing different things.  It is true that, for a long time, we did not have this appreciation for the eucharistic prayer. The moment and words of consecration were given so much importance that they virtually eclipsed the rest of the eucharistic prayer. Bells would be rung, the choir would not sing, everyone would observe silence, all but the priest would be on their knees. While all this spoke of immense faith and devotion, the disadvantage of that was (in retrospect) that we tended to overlook the rest of that one prayer of which the words of consecration are “only” a part.” - EWTN Library

I know - this is an old tired issue - but lately some bloggers have been  reprising old issues, such as everyone going to communion in swimsuits, and chest-bumps and moose-licks during the sign of peace, etc., so I thought I’d throw this into the mix.

“I’m mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore!” - A quote from C. of A. I think…or was that from ‘Network’?

ANYONE CARE TO COMMENT?

You know that word verification thing you have to go through on some blogs when you want to make comments?  I sometimes find it annoying, but sometimes it can be fun.  It can be like that scramble game in the newspapers where you have to unscramble letters to make a word.

I just ran into one that spelled, “tymafyi” - which when sounded out reminded me of Tina Faye.  See how fun that is.  (I know!  I didn’t even have to unscranble it.) 

Then - this is really weird, I was commenting on a post about gay pride - you will not believe the letters I had to copy out, “lesfggy” - “lesbian faggy” is what I got from that.  Some blogs have numbers too, I encountered one that had “2 g d 2 g 4″ - which I immediately identified as “too good to go for”.  Isn’t that so cool?  And what about this one on a blogspot where the blogger may be mentally ill (not you!); “mpdjir” - which I read as “multiple personality disorder jerk”.  (I’m not making this up either.)

Commenting - it’s fun!  Try it on my blogs sometime. 

If you have ever been to Rome, you will know what I mean.  Tell me the Sistine Chapel isn’t soft porn!  What is next, an illustrated “Theology of the Body” series, or “The Joys of Theology of the Body”?

(Just trying to get my stats up here!  I only get an average of 255 hits a day, and very few comments.)

[Watch for my upcoming expose on Roman priests.] 

Masons!

I found an interesting interview on Zenit with a Spanish priest’s investigation into Masonry.  (I’ll link to it and post a snippet or two after a few quick anecdotes of my own.)

Certainly, the Masonic influence upon society and politics since the French Revolution must be realized as certain by many knowledgeable Catholics, so I don’t really want to deal with all of that here.  Of course Masons are the bane of conspiracy theorists throughout the world, sede-vacantists, SSPX-ers, as well as neo-Nazis and white supremacists.  (Although, you rarely hear that liberals call people Masons - kidding.)

The cult effect.

Locally, there is a rather charismatic priest who genuinely believes most of the ills in society and the Church are due to the international Masonic conspiracy.  A good deal of his followers seem to agree.  Within those ranks are one or two who claim there are Masons even in the local Church.

One fellow, a PI (private investigator) now retired, suggested that even at one of the most conservative local Catholic parishes, Masons were stalking the sanctuary.  Alas - I quit my job before I could get details.  Intriguing huh?  Of course, people have accused Marcel Lefebvre of being a Mason as well, so it slices both ways.  (Although everyone knows Anibale Bugnini was a Mason.)  I think the nuns who taught me were Masons too, because we used to get tickets for the Shrine Circus.  No wonder Sr. Vivian was such a… 

Years ago I stopped in Chicago with a friend, on our way home after we drove to see JPII in Detroit.  My friend wanted to visit a weeping statue of Our Lady.  It was one of the weirdest experiences of my life.  An old Felician sister was there selling books and religious articles, spouting off about the infamous Cardinal Bernardin.  “He was a Mason!” she said, insisting he was in cahoots with the grand International Conspiracy of Masonic Jewish Bankers.  She was a nasty little woman indeed.  (Although I like the word cahoots.) 

This is really a serious post despite the labels.

(I just don’t want to come off as a conspiracy theorist.) 

Anyway, that’s all I have today on the subject, but here are a couple snips from the article with a link to read the entire thing.  Enjoy!

New Age connection.

Q: Does Masonry substitute itself for religion?

Father Guerra: Masonry, in line with one of its products, the New Age, prefers to use the term “spirituality,” which has a more subjective resonance than the term “religion.”

Some Masons say that they are Christians and deny that Masonry is a religion. They should rather recognize that they belong to two religions: the Catholic one and the Masonic one.

But in fact, at least for many, above all for the Masons who are agnostics and deists, Masonry is a substitute for religion. Indeed, Masonry is called a “religion” and sometimes “the religion” in Masonic writings and those of Masons.

They are everywhere.

Q: Is the famous Masonic conspiracy a myth?

Father Guerra: It is necessary to distinguish between Masonry and the Masons. Masonry, as such, does not aspire to power or at least to having it serve its own principles and interests.

Nevertheless, Masons are in fact present in every international organization in which decisions are made and in the multinational corporations that have an influence on economic and political power.

It is logical to think that they try to pass on their ideological principles — relativism, atheism, gnosticism — wherever they are and to irradiate them beyond their own context. - Zenit

“You can’t handle the truth!” - Jack Nicholson

So what if all of these Protestant converts coming into the Church - well some of them - are really Masons?  Or the Trads - yes the Trads - what if they…Or Fr. Richard McBrien- yeah, he has to be.  (Look for that little Fez thing they wear.)