Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Why are some traditionalists so angry?

And why are some liberals so subversive?

I found out that some traditionalists are indeed very angry, as well as defensive, and in some cases offensive. I found out so-called liberals are as well. I'm trying to understand why.

Traditionalists have been labeled with all sorts of names, they have been marginalized and ostracised and off-handedly dismissed as fanatics. That is extremely unfair.

Yet, simply because one is a "novus ordo Catholic" that does not mean one is a liberal. Nevertheless, in the post-Vatican II Church there definitely has been quite a lot of subversive behavior going on, while there has been constructed a sort of Berlin-wall against anything traditional. Every one knows this, including myself, although some people do wonder what I see under all of that sand.

Today's first reading made me think about some of our shepherds, such as Archbishop Roach, now deceased, his predecessor, and a couple of other local Bishops from our recent past, such as Bishop Bullock. (He once said he wasn't aware of any homosexual clergy in the archdiocese, that was in the '90's - not 1890's.)

At the beginning of today's first reading for Mass from Ezekiel we hear:

"Thus says the Lord God: Woe to the shepherds of Israel who have been pasturing themselves! Should not shepherds, rather, pasture sheep?"

I think I will lift my head out of the sand and take a look around. I'll keep the mocked and wounded Christ as my light however, realizing it is He both sides sometimes wound. Let us pray for healing of our wounds, and pray that our splintered Church may once again be assembled into that holy cross of Christ.


  1. I too thought of a few bishops as I heard that reading.However, it was the Gospel reading that really jumped out at me. I think some of the division is because we vary in our positions on the Faith journey. If one is poorly catechized, it is easy to discard this practice or invent a new one. Poor catechesis may cause one to cling to something because it was always done that way when a new practice maintains doctrinal integrity. If we ever could get us all on the same page of catechesis, I think a lot of the liberal vs traditional/orthodox divisions would disappear.

  2. "Poor catechesis may cause one to cling to something because it was always done that way when a new practice maintains doctrinal integrity"

    Excuse me. Because the post is about why Traditionalists are angry I assume (correct me please if I am wrong) that by the above you mean that Catholics before Vatican II were poorly catechized and therfore did not accept(clung to) the new Mass and orientation of the Church despite it having "doctrinal integrity"? If this is what you meant, that is downright insulting to the intelligence of those who claim the label Traditionalists. If this is NOT what you meant, than please excuse and explain yourself.

    Traditionalists are not just nostalgic people harping about non-essentials and not all of them are old ladies pining for "how it was always done" I suggest you read "The Great Facade" or better yet some writings of the Church that predate the 60's and JP II to better understand why we are so angry and not make whopping generalizations about people's catechesis and intelligence.

  3. Edit: "Clung to" should've been before "did not accept". I certainly don't "cling to" anything of the new practices if I don't have too.


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.