See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient with it until it receives the early and the late rains. - James 5:7

Tuesday, August 09, 2011

How very dare you...



So what's so bad about asking questions regarding the status of a conservative priest who happens to be something of a public personality on his own right?  On the other hand, why is it perfectly fine to ask questions, criticize, and even condemn liberal priests and bishops?  Both categories of men are ordained - the "anointed of the Lord" - so why the double standard?

53 comments:

  1. Why is it a "double standard" if one of them is a heretic or makes up his own liturgy?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Both sides should be accepting of criticism. I think Terry, that what some people misunderstand is that criticism is not necessarily an attack.

    Conservatives and Liberals in the church, belong in the Church.

    Pointing out what one is doing wrong, and listing proofs is NOT an attack. Calling them heretics, even if accurate, is not conducive to fraternal correction that is required and hopefully bringing them back or keeping them from leaving the Church.

    Calling either side names serves no purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous8:32 AM

    I may be wrong but I don't recall seeing anyone go after any of the liberal clerics (who didn't commit crimes - so that excludes Weakland and the like) on a personal "expose" type level. Never seen a conservativce organ examine why McBrien - a priest of the diocese of Hartford - has had no role in that diocese for decades/what his digs in South Bend are like/what his salary and travel budget are.

    Jack

    ReplyDelete
  4. Okay, nothing to add to that mess (I don't wade into such matters anymore - it gives me the pip), but HOW VERY VERY DARE YOU?! HOMOLULU? MY MOTHER AND I HAVE BEEN VISITING THIS WEBLOG FOR 20 YEARS AND I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO INSULTED IN ALL MY LIFE."

    :):):)

    (Why doesn't everyone know the genius that is she?)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Austringer9:12 AM

    I suppose it depends upon what you mean by "liberals" and "conservatives" -- both terms that are not very useful here.

    If the term "liberal" is a euphemism for "dissents from Church teaching", and "conservative" is a euphemism for "faithful the Church's teaching", then I see no reason why criticizing both parties is morally equivalent. Dissent is dissent, and is destructive to the faithful.

    I accept that within the boundaries of "faithful to the Magisterium", there exists a range of views which could reasonably be described as liberal or conservative (mostly on "social justice" issues such as the best means to address poverty).

    But is that what is being addressed here?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jack,
    Weakland didn't need someone to expose him in a personal expose.

    He did it himself, all by himself.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ray - I'm not talking about heretics or dissenters - I said 'liberals' - which is what trads call anyone who prefers the ordinary form of Mass and similar things.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Puff - prayers for London - I've watched the goings on on TV - anarchy.

    You are also right on about criticism - it isn't always an attack.

    As far as researching one's background and discussing it either publicly, semi-publicly, or privately - some of my commenters and readers have done the same with me - even googling my house - which they can see from their car as they drive by! LOL! Nothing to hide here anyway. I think some folks protest too much. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jack - Charlotte answered you comment.

    Charlotte - thank hon.

    Austringer - I think my comment to Ray cleared that one up.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Puff - I meant the prayers for London remark for the Priest's wife - sorry - I'm reading and typing so fast! LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Cathy - I am so glad you caught that - I love Catherine Tate - what a talent. Anyway, I had a guy who worked for me who was exactly like Derek - he even lived with his mom.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous10:57 AM

    Terry 9:51, Please remember there is a distinction between Trads who accept Vatican II, but prefer TLM and SSPX types. The former do not see those who prefer the OF as being liberals necessarily. I would just say they are orthodox, faithful Catholics.

    -Clark

    ReplyDelete
  13. Gee Clark - I did not know that. LOL! But truth be told, some of the former do indeed consider those who prefer the OF as being liberals - that is kind of my point.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ter, have you ever seen "Lauren meets the Queen" - it was from the Royal Variety Show a few years back and HRH was really in the audience.
    It is HILARIOUS and suffice it to say, QE2 wasn't bov-vered at all.
    It's on YouTube.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Austringer11:35 AM

    Hi Terry,

    You wrote: "I said 'liberals' - which is what trads call anyone who prefers the ordinary form of Mass and similar things."

    Ummm, is that a fair description? I know quite a few Catholics who prefer the OF (personally, I don't care either way, as long as it's done reverently and the way the Church intends), but who would be certainly classified as "conservative" in the usual AmCath way of looking at these things.

    I think it's fairly accurate to tsay that when "liberal" and "conservative" are used in this country in referring to Catholics, it usually means this: "conservatives" accept Church teaching, especially in the area of sexual morality, contraception, women's ordination, tradition in the liturgy, and so on. "Liberal" usually means someone who is in favor of women's ordination, acceptance of same-sex marriage, liturgical innovation, and a married priesthood.

    With all due respect, I think that's a more accurate description of the general usage of the terms than what you give.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous11:53 AM

    I really don't think most EF only, Vatican II accepting Catholics see those who are solid in their faith and prefer the OF as being "liberal." I think we wonder why sometimes, but I don't think of them as liberal.

    I overslept on Sunday and had to attend the OF and I have to say, it was a very weird experience for me. It reminded me of a Presbyterian funeral I had to attend once. No offense to anyone...don't get excited, but I just don't get the appeal AND YES I'm fully aware, many don't get the appeal of the EF.

    As far as your original question goes, I think it is very wise in this day and age to know more about our priests, especially a priest that has become as influential as Fr Z. I used to wonder about people like Sr Briege McKenna and Fr Laurentin.

    -Clark

    ReplyDelete
  17. Thanks Austringer - I guess I'm not all that good with labels. While working at the Catholic bookstore I often heard that Ratzinger was a liberal, and people who liked the Mass in English were too. I admit I'm not PC when it comes to the label stuff.

    I consider myself conservative and traditional - but others may not.

    Is the point I'm trying to make here really so hard to understand? I suppose I will just shelve this post and call it a fail.

    Picky, picky. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  18. See what happens when you dissent Terry? They'll turn on you in a hot minute.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Clark I don't think most EF or OF people think like online Catholics think, period. Not a few bloggers and commenters have really big issues they deal with - some are even priests.

    Some are on medication. Some should be. Some are alcoholics, some recovering. The Internet is home to fanatics and crazy people.

    How's that for discretion?

    I crack myself up!

    ReplyDelete
  20. But I'm not even dissenting Thom. LOL!

    Like I said - I try so hard just to bring people together here!

    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL! Gotta run to the Canon Law Conference now.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Sorry, Terry, you are SO dissenting. You dared to say that the OF is equal to the EF. You dared to raise the notion of a double standard in criticism.

    You're such a no good heretic.

    Baby Jesus will make you homeless and you'll sleep on the liberal streets wrapped in a certain Catholic newspaper for warmth, mumbling incoherently in Latin about "Jesus, mercy."

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous12:18 PM

    I don't think their liberals...I just think they have bad taste. What? I imagine their houses with vinyl siding and stocked with canned vegetables, white bread and frozen hot dogs.

    -Clark

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous12:27 PM

    ooops...meant thy're

    Terry is cracking himself up today...

    -Clark

    ReplyDelete
  24. You know - maybe I should have made this post a caption call on the photo I used instead?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Austringer2:23 PM

    Gee, Thom, I hardly think that trying to clarify the terms used is "turning on" Terry.

    I get Terry's main point, despite my thinking that the terms used weren't helpful.

    I seem to recall reading (or was it in the movie?) that Padre Pio turned on a man who was criticizing a bishop who, objectively speaking, may have deserved being criticized. The point is that they are ordained -- an indelible imprint has been made on their souls -- and we should have profound respect for that. Agreed!

    But, dissent is dissent, and is destructive to souls. The challenge is to correct or question -- not condemn -- the specific error, not the person. Such correction is not morally equivalent to questioning or criticizing a faithful priest who just happens to irritate, annoy, or who points out our own errors.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thanks Austringer - I think Thom is just really joking.

    Do you think Fr. Z is like Padre Pio now? Kidding. Just kidding.

    I think I'll give Mrs. D. a call.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Austringer3:48 PM

    Now your last comment has really got me laughing....and more than a little scared!!

    Seriously, I'm not that knowledgeable of Fr. Z, truth be told. I think I've gone to his blog mostly when you linked to him, and I've liked what he has to say.

    Not a fan, not a critic.

    But I am a fan of yours, so forgive me for harping on the dang terms.

    ReplyDelete
  28. *
    “…why is it perfectly fine to ask questions, criticize, and even condemn liberal priests and bishops?...”

    Truth is not our making, but God's.

    The Church in her history, due reparation made, has always welcomed the heretic back into the treasury of her souls, but never his heresy into the treasury of her wisdom.

    Some think the condemnation of Heresy or Liberalism is an attack upon the body and soul of those in Heresy or Liberals. Heresy and liberalism can lead souls out of Holy Mother Church.

    We love the sinner; this is a part of Charity. To love God is the beginning of Charity.

    In 1910, Pope St. Pius X issued his Catechism which teaches

    “No one can be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman Church, just as no one could be saved from the Flood outside the Ark of Noe, which was a figure of the Church.” (The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X. Republished by Instauratio Press, Australia, pp. 31, 41).

    Such is the constant teaching of the Catholic Church from the beginning, throughout the Middle Ages and even unto this day, though unfortunately, today there are few that believe it. Heresy and liberalism can lead souls out of Holy Mother Church.

    Today, we are in the grip of the Great Apostasy described by St. Paul in Second Thessalonians.

    Calling out heresy and liberalism is a far cry from putting the Holy Ministry of a Priest to the scrutiny of the laity.

    In the light of traditionalism, be not forgetful of my many admonitions of His Excellency Bishop Bernard Fellay of abusing the graces our Divine Master has given to the SSPX.

    Let us attack the kingdom of Satan with vigor, the chaff within the wheat.

    Let us pray for and help in all other ways those trapped in sin.

    Heresy and liberalism can lead souls to Hell.

    It is good to understand what a Liberal is.

    A Liberal believes in many truths, and not the one Truth.

    Even though they claim to believe in God, they actually do not.

    As a matter of fact, when Liberals finally meet Christ, they won’t like Him because He won’t meet their expectations.

    Where do we get our yardstick by which we measure?

    From the catechism of Holy Mother Church, and the sermons at Mass.

    *

    ReplyDelete
  29. "Today, we are in the grip of the Great Apostasy described by St. Paul in Second Thessalonians."

    The Mormons interpret that passage that way too, Pablo.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Pablo, I'm not about to believe that all Protestants go to Hell. That would be Feeneyism. I'll trust the things that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, aka the Pope, has to say on the matter.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "...The Mormons interpret that passage that way too, Pablo..."

    Satan can quote scripture with the best of them.

    However, unlike Mormons and Satan, I am a member in good standing in Holy Mother Church.

    Therefore, I can freely rely on and quote Scripture with authority, as Daniel did when he defended Susanna:

    Daniel, chapter 13:

    [45] And when she was led to be put to death, the Lord raised up the holy spirit of a young boy, whose name was Daniel.

    *

    ReplyDelete
  32. You can't, however, bastardize it for your own purposes.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "I don't think their liberals...I just think they have bad taste. What? I imagine their houses with vinyl siding and stocked with canned vegetables, white bread and frozen hot dogs." Clark

    this, I like.

    ReplyDelete
  34. “No one can be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman Church, just as no one could be saved from the Flood outside the Ark of Noe, which was a figure of the Church.” (The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X. Republished by Instauratio Press, Australia, pp. 31, 41)."

    And let's not forget that Eastern Catholics are not Roman Catholics, and they sure as hell are saved.

    Pius or not, God saves, not human beings.

    Ace

    ReplyDelete
  35. Holy Mother Church teaches outside of Her, there is no salvation.

    To not believe this places one outside of Holy Mother Church.

    Have there been times when salvation was available to people that had placed themselves outside of God’s grace and mercy?

    For your consideration:

    The Deluge.

    In all the histories of past ages, there is nothing so terrible as this event.

    What became of all those myriads of human beings who perished on this occasion?

    We know not.

    Some have charitably supposed, that although the far greater part perished everlastingly, a few who had been incredulous while Noe preached, opened their eyes at last, when it was too late to save their bodies, and by sincere repentance rescued their souls from the flames of Hell, and were consigned to do penance, for a time, in the other world.

    They deserved to partake of the mercies of Christ, and joyfully beheld his sacred person when he came to visit them in their prison of purgatory. 1 Peter 3:19:

    “He came and preached to those spirits that were in prison: which had, been sometime incredulous, when they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is eight souls, were saved from drowning by water.

    Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saves you also...”

    In these last words of S. Peter, we may also notice, that the ark was a figure of baptism, which is so necessary, that with its reception, or desire of it at least, no man can be saved.

    It is also a figure of the Cross, and of the one true Church (Holy Roman Catholic).

    This is so striking, that it deserves to be seriously considered.

    It was only one, though God could have ordered many smaller vessels to be made ready, perhaps with less inconvenience to Noe, that we might reflect, out of the one Church the obstinate will surely perish (Protestantism?).

    In the ark all that were truly holy, and some imperfect, like Cham, were contained, clean beasts and unclean dwelt together, that we need not wonder if some Catholics be a disgrace to their name.

    The ark had different partitions, to remind us of the various orders of clergy and laity in the Church, with one chief governor, the Pope, like Noe in the ark.

    It was strong, visible, and pitched all over with the durable cement, bitumen, and riding triumphant amid the storms, the envy of all who were out of it, till at last it settled upon a rock.

    So the Church is built on a rock, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail.

    Those outside of the Ark perished.

    Holy Mother Church teaches outside her there is no salvation.

    *

    ReplyDelete
  36. Pablo - the POPE does not claim that all Orthodox and Protestants go to Hell, and Pius XII even reprimanded a priest for saying so.

    There is no salvation outside the Church - this is clear, but visible membership perceivable to US is not always guaranteed. Only God knows who is saved and who is not, and only He can judge the hearts of men. Those who make it to Heaven may make it there despite their separation, not because of it, of course.

    Anyone who is outside of the Church through no fault of his own, and who honestly follows what light of Truth he does have to do the will of God - I say let God take care of them. So does the pope, so did the last few popes, and so did holy men like Padre Pio, among others.

    To pretend like all Protestants and Orthodox are nothing but obstinate heretics and schismatics is not honest, and it ignores the human reality brought about by sin on all sides, and it also ignores the Mercy of God, who alone can judge hearts.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I am constantly in pain, and have many wounds to tend, as the Truth hurts me also.

    If I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

    I have commented Charitably, truthfully and voiced the teachings of Holy Mother Church in the process.

    "...There is no salvation outside the Church - this is clear,..."

    You argue my case for me.

    *

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anonymous5:53 PM

    Trads would refer to your type as a Liberal because that's what you were a few generations ago when trads were normal Catholics. The liberals of today are apostates. I consider you a neo cath.
    Got more to say on the post topic but I'm nearing the end of my manic phase and don't really care much anymore. Have a nice day!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Austringer - glad you got the joke!

    ReplyDelete
  40. I think trads are often concerned with things "normal Catholics" were never concerned with - women in pants is a case in point, or an overwhelming pessimism, etc.

    I think much of "trad" subculture has been invented based off of what people read about and try to reconstruct the past, since most "trads" weren't even around then.

    This is why several "trads" ignore the statements of pontiffs, orthodox theologians and moral theologians who were writing in the 40s, 50s, and 60s.


    Pablo - the Catechism of the Catholic Church says as much, but then goes on to explain how this must be balanced with "Go wills that all men be saved". Read the document "Dominus Jesus", you can find it on the Vatican's website.

    I have several Protestant family members and I pray that they come "back" to the Church (some of them never were Catholic, some left in the upheavals of the early 70s). But if they die outside of it, I'm not going to simply assume they're burning in Hell either, but will pray for their souls and for mercy, and have masses offered for them. I hope this doesn't make me a heretic.

    I also had a cousin who died - he wasn't Catholic (not even a good Christian), but some things happened right before he passed away that I can only count as Christ breaking through to a hardened heart. So whenever I pray for the souls in Purgatory, I mention his name.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Ha! I just got the Padre Pio joke!

    ReplyDelete
  42. Not sure what all this is about ( I'm pre occupied with news of the riot here, which last night was perilously close to the end of my road)
    But I did get the Catherine Tate reference. Glad to know she's reached the antennae of the more discerning yankee.

    ReplyDelete
  43. In the days of Abraham Lincoln, Republicans were Liberals, and Democrats were conservatives.

    The flavor of the day is now the opposite.

    Things are constantly changing in the world because it refuses to submit to Truth.

    Even many that profess to be Catholic, are not.

    We are more dependent on God's mercy now than at any other time.

    It is not a matter of smugness to state someone is going to Hell it is a matter of raising the alarm that they may convert.

    I asked a Buddhist if Buddha created the world.

    She said no.

    I asked her who did.

    She would not admit the Truth, but held fast in her heretical belief.

    Pray people harden not their hearts.

    Seek after the Truth.

    *

    ReplyDelete
  44. Toddler=canned veges, white bread, and hot dogs. Just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Terry,
    Don't forget that "neo-cath" is just as bad as "liberal." Or so they say.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Pablo, I never said those who remain outside are not on danger. I only meant that God is the judge of who ultimately makes it and who doesn't. Telling my family members that I "know" they are going to hell is not charity, especially since humilty tells me these people have suffered much and clung to Christ through it all when I was busy living like a pagan.

    ReplyDelete
  47. If we see someone on fire do we not run to help him?

    If we see someone risking their mortal soul, why don't we have that same fervor to save them?

    "The bourgeois, even when he is a 'good Catholic,' believes only in this world, in the expedient and the useful; he is incapable of living by faith in another world and refuses to base his life on the mystery of Golgotha....The bourgeois is an idolator, enslaved by the visible. 'Idolatry is the preference of the visible to the invisible.' 'Business' is the bourgeois's god, his absolute....He is bereft of any spiritual fire, of any spiritual creativeness, but has his own 'faith' and superstitions."
    - Léon Bloy

    *

    ReplyDelete
  48. Anonymous7:41 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Pablo, the quote you mentioned didn't have anything to do with what we were discussing.

    Again, do you propose that Catholics with non-Catholic family members constantly remind them "you know, you think you love Jesus and you think he cares about you, but you are going to Hell"

    This is not even what the pope teaches, not what the Catechism teaches. Pray, yes, and take every opportunity to tel them about the Catholic faith ... but don't you think it's a bit stupid for someone like me - someone they knew as a nominal Christian - to now come and say "oh by the way, I have all the answers - you are going to Hell when you die to be punished eternally".

    And "Anonymous" 7:41, you are not a Christian.

    ReplyDelete
  50. And by the way, I'm not talking about people who are flagrant and unrepentant sinners, but people who have put their lives in God's hands - people who see His hand in everything, and who wouldn't think of making a decision without His blessing - I WISH I had faith like that.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Terry, please remove that Anonymous creep from your comment box. He's an evil, rotten soul.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Hoo boy, nice little fever swamp you have cultivated here, Terry.
    I remain Catholic because Catholicism as the Church teaches it is wide and generous and, well, "catholic". If it means only a few folks who know Latin are saved, screw it.
    A God Who is trying to damn as many as He can is no god I wish to spend Eternity with.

    ReplyDelete
  53. “…Pablo, the quote you mentioned didn't have anything to do with what we were discussing.

    Again, do you propose that Catholics with non-Catholic family members constantly remind them "you know, you think you love Jesus and you think he cares about you, but you are going to Hell"…

    That quote has everything to do with the subject at hand.

    It addresses those traditional Catholics that go about the ‘Business’ of Faith. They presume much, and take for granted they will go to Heaven.

    When Anonymous 7:41 said not everyone that says “Lord, Lord” will get into Heaven, that included those of us who go about treating Faith as business.

    My relatives, may they rest in peace, were dirt poor, uneducated at school, stinky Mexicans that attended the Tridentine Mass in Latin, and were well catechized by their parish Priest.

    In every Tridentine missal ever made, there is a translation on the right in the language of the region.

    In Hebrew, Latin, and Greek, are the words ‘King of the Jews” inscribed above Christ crucified.

    It is God’s way of telling us what languages we are to use.

    Mr. Nelson has a good blog going on here; if someone evil cruises by, it more likely is due to the Mother of Mercy sending him here as a step towards conversion.

    We Catholics need to take inventory.

    Are we really Catholic?

    *

    ReplyDelete


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.