Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Papal positivism is not Catholicism

Nothing shows more clearly the absolute FAILURE of Catholic religious education in our country than the fact that many Catholics believe that the Pope can change doctrine.

He
CAN'T. He's ONLY the Pope.

No creed of the Church has the words "I believe the divinely inspired words of the Roman Pontiff."

None of them do, because papal positivism is
NOT Catholicism. It is, in fact, idolatry.
In fact as my old friend Jeff Culbreath pointed out after he was received into the church, we Tridentine Massers are among the least likely to buy that stuff. We're actually more like the Orthodox minus the cultural idolatry (no wonder I can be at home in both rites): run largely by custom, where the ordinary practice of the Catholic religion won't just stop.

I don't watch EWTN.
I can't help but sense that ultramontanist tendencies must have contributed to the chaos during or following the Second Vatican Council.
They sure did. The liberals knew exactly how to order Catholics around. Archbishop Lefebvre remarked on that. (He actually wasn't an extremist to begin with; the self-righteous revisionists made him one.) When I came into the church in the '80s, priests left and center-right would tell you it was all God's will and you were disobedient or even outside the church if you hated it. Liberals would likely add the condescension of pathologizing you (playing psychologist): you want things to stay the same because you're sick. (Pope Francis' "rigidity" remarks.)
What has EWTN got to do with it? Raymond Arroyo is one of Pope Francis's critics. Besides, the fact that we are not supposed to idolize the pope doesn't mean we shouldn't honor him.
You know things are serious when EWTN criticizes the Pope! Still better than under John Paul II, thanks to Benedict XVI's reform of the English Mass. I remember EWTN's "I like Vatican II" '80s version: give up that artsy old-fashioned stuff and become a charismatic, using devotional stuff to fill the void. The John Paul II fan club. No, thanks.

2 comments:

  1. "I can't help but sense that ultramontanist tendencies must have contributed to the chaos during or following the Second Vatican Council."

    Sorry, but I don't think so. PP6 and PJP2 were heavily criticized by the liberals for not going far enough, especially PJP2. PJP2 had been accused of trying to shut down V2 when in fact he tried to implement it in an orthodox manner as it had supposedly been implemented in Poland. Also, I too am not PJP2's greatest fan, but his encyclicals were not too bad, although I still have a problem with his anti-death penalty stance--you can't just turn over Church doctrine even though the overturning pastorally oriented. Such matters really are the province of the laity. After all, the Church turned over her court-convicted clerical miscreants/criminals to secular authorities for punishment/sentencing in past ages.

    The ultramontane liberals have risen to the forefront with the elevation of Papa Bergoglio to the Papacy; God help us and have mercy on us. Reminds me of the old saying attributed to St. Jerome, "The whole world groaned and marvelled to find itself Arian."

    ReplyDelete
  2. ". . . the absolute FAILURE of Catholic religious education in our country . . . ."

    It is so bad IMHO that today ironically one might get a better Catholic education, relatively speaking, from a Bible-believing, biblically-oriented Evangelical/Fundamentalist Church's religious education program. Therein you will encounter death, judgement, heaven & hell (the Four Last Things), the Holy Sacrifice of the Cross, Salvation, Jesus as God & Man (you might even hear the occasional doctrinal terms such as True God and True Man . . . even Trinity, although "dogma" is not desirable to Evangelicals/Fundamentalists), the Second Coming, etc., etc. These are the types of things (plus much more that would not be taught in a Fundamentalist setting) I heard or was taught as a youth in the pre-V2 Church. Even then, religious education was not the greatest by any stretch of the imagination.

    ReplyDelete

Leave comment