"Time to stop being a traditional Catholic"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peter_J
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Peter_J

Guest
I’m wondering if anyone can help me steel-up my resolve to remain a traditional Catholic. I ask this in reference to the following post from the well-known blogger “The young fogey” (Serge).

Note: All quotes are from HW Crocker III’s review of “The Russian Church and the Papacy” by Vladimir Soloviev, (2002 issue of The Latin Mass).

I am dumbstruck by this - worse than New Oxford Review’s attack nearly two years ago.

That a traditional liturgical Christian in the Catholic Church would attack other Christians with the same core orthodox beliefs and a similar commitment to a traditional rite seems to me the height of bloody-mindedness.
“The Russian Church and the Papacy” by Vladimir Soloviev
Soloviev got some of his ideas from Jacob Boehme — an unlikely hero for Catholics.
“…As Newman might have said, but didn’t, ‘To be deep in history is to realize that the Eastern Orthodox are crazy’. They are now, they were then, and they always have been.”
Uncharity/defamation aside, this can’t be the position of the Catholic Church because all of Eastern Orthodoxy’s positive doctrinal statements are completely Catholic. IOW, to Catholics, Orthodoxy IS Catholicism circa 1000 in Greek theological language. So to attack Eastern Orthodoxy is to attack the foundational beliefs of their own church.
“…wherever you find the Eastern Orthodox, there you will find people who live not by the words of Jesus- ‘forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us’- … but by the grudge and the ‘narcissism of small differences’, in Freud’s apposite phrase (sic). In their surly defensiveness, hatred, and envy of the West, the Eastern Orthodox are the Islamicists of the Christian world. The West offers the hand of friendship, the East responds with intemperance, abuse and fear.”
Has this person never read Dostoevsky? He went over my head (I admit I don’t get The Brothers Karamazov) but the simple Christianity - humility, forgiveness - of Russian Orthodoxy is obvious.

However, the charges of uncharity and the narcissism of small diferences do apply to people in the East as well as the West, inventing differences where there really aren’t any. Every time when in English I hear ’ The-o-TO-kos!’ where ‘Mother of God’ will work, I think of this.
"…but while the Orthodox surrendered the secular realm to the emperor or the czar- wanting nothing more than to assert their nationalistic, ecclesiastical independence from Rome-
What ‘surrender’? The emperor and czar were Orthodox too. Did Catholics ‘surrender’ the secular realm to the Hapsburgs?
and retreated to their monasteries, ‘the Western Church, faithful to the apostolic mission, has not been afraid to plunge into the mires of history’. "
OMG. Ironically he sounds just like a liberal church-worker in his own church making fun of people like him — Tridentine people. ‘Give up that artsy-fartsy old-fashioned stuff and live in the modern world — give up those silly devotions and work for PEACE and JUSTICE, man.’ I have had something a lot like this thrown in my face, to my face, by an angry Catholic of the conservative persuasion. Makes Khomiakov and Popovich look right — that for all their complaints these people really are part of the same entity as Amchurch and even the Protestants. All on the same team.
"…to the additional horror of his Eastern Orthodox readers- and to the horror of Protestants who have fled into the Orthodox fold seeking tradition and a defense against liberalism-
Aha. The writer hates the Orthodox because he sees them as competition.
Soloviev says flatly that the Orthodox churches are Protestant.
Like the Protestants, the Orthodox churches reduce the fullness of the Christian vision.
Too true in practice - I find it hard to believe that God meant for the one true Church to be several jurisdictions trying to blackguard each other. And while too often Catholics like this fellow reduce Catholicity to Romanness, there exists Byzantine Rite chauvinism as well.
In the Orthodox case, a sort of ‘sola pietas’ boxed within 'past history, dogmatic formula, and a liturgical ceremonial’. "
The same thing Novus Ordo types say about the writer of this screed and his kind, and the same thing liberal, feminist, homosexualist, etc. Episcopalians say about those Episcopalians who stick to historic liturgies, the Bible and the creeds. Again, bitterly ironic, like this guy is inadvertently sawing off the branch he is sitting on.
"… for readers who take no interest in the East, it is still worth reading for the light it shines on our own Catholic faith. For readers who are dyspeptic, antiquarian, nationalist, cranky, bearded fanatics, it might even offer inspiration to join the Eastern Orthodox.
Again, this writer sounds just like his enemies in the Catholic Church.
But if you, like me, yearn for the Sack of Byzantium to become a feast day of the Church, and feel wistful when you muse on that one shining moment when there was a French speaking Crusader kingdom there, this book will be a pleasure and a confirmation.
One wishes the writer is visited by apparitions of Leonid Feodorov and Metropolitans Andrew (Sheptytsky) and Joseph (Slipyj), who can take turns whacking him upside the head.

I wonder if he hates Eastern Catholics too.
 
What’s the point of this thread? Why not go post a reply on the guy’s blog if you don’t like his post?

What does it have to do with traditional Catholicism?
 
Why not go post a reply on the guy’s blog if you don’t like his post?
I’m afraid I don’t know what you mean. I’ve already heard what Serge has to say about the matter, I’m interested in hearing what traditional Catholics have to say about it. (Others are welcome to post as well, of course.)
What does it have to do with traditional Catholicism?
You don’t see a connection between The Latin Mass Magazine and traditional Catholicism?
 
Keep in mind that every group has it’s crazies, and a lot of them get published, and some of them pretend they are a lot more representative than they are. (The American Catholic Council is an embarrassment to us all, for example.)

I don’t tend to consider myself a Traditional Catholic - orthodox of course, and loyal to the teaching of the Church but with no special preference for the older forms of the mass and the like over a (properly executed) OF - and am not actually even entirely familiar with what that phrase means. But I have a hard time believing that that article is broadly representative of the Traditional group, and wouldn’t let a single crazy push you one way or the other (no matter how well published).
 
Keep in mind that every group has it’s crazies, and a lot of them get published, and some of them pretend they are a lot more representative than they are.
I guess it’s the *published *part that strikes me. If the article had been, say, just a blog entry or a post on a forum, that wouldn’t be terribly significant. But it was an article in The Latin Mass, so …

On the other hand, I do consider myself a traditional Catholic, and it’s possible that I have an overly high opinion of traditional Catholics and traditional Catholic publications.
 
Note: All quotes are from HW Crocker III’s review of “The Russian Church and the Papacy” by Vladimir Soloviev, (2002 issue of The Latin Mass).
That review isn’t available online, as far as I know, but here are some excerpts. (Sorry if these are inadequate. But I think they at least cover all the parts that Serge quoted.)

“…As Newman might have said, but didn’t, ‘To be deep in history is to realize that the Eastern Orthodox are crazy’. They are now, they were then, and they always have been.”

“…wherever you find the Eastern Orthodox, there you will find people who live not by the words of Jesus- ‘forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us’- … but by the grudge and the ‘narcissism of small differences’, in Freud’s apposite phrase. In their surly defensiveness, hatred, and envy of the West, the Eastern Orthodox are the Islamicists of the Christian world. The West offers the hand of friendship, the East responds with intemperance, abuse and fear.”

"…but while the Orthodox surrendered the secular realm to the emperor or the czar- wanting nothing more than to assert their nationalistic, ecclesiastical independence from Rome- and retreated to their monasteries, ‘the Western Church, faithful to the apostolic mission, has not been afraid to plunge into the mires of history’. "

"…to the additional horror of his Eastern Orthodox readers- and to the horror of Protestants who have fled into the Orthodox fold seeking tradition and a defense against liberalism- Soloviev says flatly that the Orthodox churches are Protestant. Like the Protestants, the Orthodox churches reduce the fullness of the Christian vision. In the Orthodox case, a sort of ‘sola pietas’ boxed within 'past history, dogmatic formula, and a liturgical ceremonial’. "

“… for readers who take no interest in the East, it is still worth reading for the light it shines on our own Catholic faith. For readers who are dyspeptic, antiquarian, nationalist, cranky, bearded fanatics, it might even offer inspiration to join the Eastern Orthodox. But if you, like me, yearn for the Sack of Byzantium to become a feast day of the Church, and feel wistful when you muse on that one shining moment when there was a French speaking Crusader kingdom there, this book will be a pleasure and a confirmation.”
 
I’m afraid I don’t know what you mean. I’ve already heard what Serge has to say about the matter, I’m interested in hearing what traditional Catholics have to say about it. (Others are welcome to post as well, of course.)
I am always leery of giving my opinion about an off site link or any post asking for such when the original poster does not give up his/her own opinion of it.

Something just strikes me as odd when a person does such.
 
I go to a diocesan parish that has one priest and says both OF and EF Mass, majority of which being OF. The parish is very much the black sheep of the diocese for being “too traditional”, but we have had parishoners leave the parish because it is “too modern” (i.e. dialogue Mass). My point is that many, even most, traditionalists are a bit nutty and self-righteous. And it is easy to be considering what you are compared to. This is why many people will call themselves orthodox Catholics (small “o”) and not traditional; there is a stigma with the title. Just remember we are all baptized Catholics, with no adjectives. There are plenty, PLENTY of equivalents of traditional Catholics in the Orthodox Church (as you know from OC.net… I’m Scotty on there btw).

In all honesty though, I wouldn’t expect anything less than that from Crocker. Have you read any of his own works? He’s a convert with an opinion, founded in what appears to be angst.

For the record I consider myself a traditionalist Catholic.
 
I’m wondering if anyone can help me steel-up my resolve to remain a traditional Catholic. I ask this in reference to the following post from the well-known blogger “The young fogey” (Serge).
You don’t have to agree with Mr. Crocker’s expressed opinions about the Eastern Orthodox in order to call yourself a traditional Catholic. I don’t and I do.

The first post returned from googling “The young fogey” (Serge), turns up evidence that overheated polemic flies in both directions. I don’t believe that most traditional Catholics or Orthodox have much interest in slinging mud east or west though.

Most blessed Theotokos, pray for us!

*Triumph *by H.W. Crocker]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top