Thursday, February 09, 2017

Catholic neocon crap: "Living Vatican II"

Well-meant conservative Catholic crap is still crap. From John Paul the Overrated's reign, in 2004. Got my fill of this stuff from American Catholic clergy in the '80s. So Catholics for centuries before Vatican II were stuck-up babies. Try again. Any insights I can mine from this I can get from saintly Roman Catholics past such as Reginald Pole and from traditional Lutherans and traditional Anglicans, not to mention Byzantine worthies, without the arrogance. Mr. Johnston can have fun preaching his "renewal" in the empty/closed churches it caused.
Neocons are usually pretty clueless.
My local church, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, hasn't even hit bottom yet. It took decades to spend down the principal it had earned before Vatican II; while it had it, it claimed the "renewal" was a smashing success. Game over: parishes are closing like crazy and we're about to lose our seminary campus. The archbishop doesn't become a cardinal anymore because, frankly, the archdiocese isn't big or important enough anymore. So how's that "Christian maturity" with the deep, informed laity working out, Mr. Johnston? The collection basket's looking pretty light these days to this guy in the pew.
Similar to the Great Renewal that was supposed to occur in mainline Protestantism once the historical Jesus was located and the Social Gospel embraced. Turn the church into a liberal talking shop and watch the average age climb, year after year.
I'm in a no-man's-land between conservative and traditionalist; I accept the council on paper and believe in the grace and truth in Pope Benedict's English Mass. I belong to a Tridentine culture; I don't fetishize it. Come to think of it, the linked essay isn't really conservative, just a lite version of the stuff "progressives" dish out.

11 comments:

  1. I think I might be a 'Neocon Catholic.'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please explain. For you, does the golden age of Catholic practice begin in the Sixties (from about 1968 to 1973) so you think it's God's will and thus a matter of obedience to tear down older practices (unless they're for Easterners, because "ecumenism")? Unlike the liberals, the neocons are orthodox but just as obnoxious and destructive.

      Delete
    2. Oh, I wouldn't say that. I thought I was neocon because I like the documents of Vatican II, I don't dislike the Novus Ordo mass, I love Pope St. John Paul II, I don't have a lot of interest in the Latin mass and I find aspects of pre-Vatican II theology somewhat narrow.

      I find myself disliking some of the tendencies to rigorism in Catholic traditionalism and it's reactionary emphasis.

      So am I neocon or traditionalist?

      Delete
    3. If you're un-traditionalist but not anti-traditionalist, you're a good conservative Novus Ordo Catholic.

      Delete
    4. That sounds like me. I like aspects of traditionalism, but overall I don't think I fit with their program.

      Delete
  2. "The archbishop doesn't become a cardinal anymore because, frankly, the archdiocese isn't big or important enough anymore. "

    The other reason why Apb. Chaput probably won't ever be elevated to the Cardinalate is that he has likely pissed off Rome with his vigorous and publicly expressed orthodoxy especially in matters of morals.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I took particular offense when the author (Living V2) referred to scholasticism as casuistry. He refers to JP2's writings in his article, but now where in those writings will anyone read that scholasticism = casuistry! Also, no mention at all of the principle purpose of the Church . . . SALVATION. Why else evangelize the world in the alleged "new springtime of the faith?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like I said, it's liberalism lite.

      Delete
    2. "Building on the council, he has proposed a sweeping vision of the human person that invites us into depths barely touched by the old scholastic casuistry."

      A particularly asinine assertion, considering that St. John Paul's dissertation advisor was the 20th century's greatest neo-scholastic Thomist of the Strict Observance, Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.

      Delete
    3. The author of that article I suspect is basically more of a modernist than a neo-con, although I suppose one could charitably opine that he doesn't even know that he is! LOL

      Delete
    4. Yes, which surprises me because I thought Crisis (formerly Catholicism in Crisis?) had a conservative reputation. That's the sucker punch of some "conservative Catholics," at least the '80s version I met.

      Delete

Leave comment