I crossed the Tiber before there was an Ordinariate, but I follow its progress with interest and prayer; in many ways, for Anglicans, it is the best way back into the Church. As a sympathiser, and a member of a blog, it was with some interest that I read that Archbishop Mueller had issued:
a word of warning about the potential problems caused by the “new media”, particularly through blogs. He said that some of the ordinariate clergy and faithful wrote blogs, which, while being a helpful tool of evangelisation, could also “express un-reflected speech lacking in charity”. The image of the ordinariate was not helped by this, he said, and it fell to the ordinaries to exercise vigilance over these blogs and, where necessary, to intervene.
It would take a degree of naiveté which I lack not to see this as one of the reasons for the outbreak of the declaration of a conflict free zone on Fr Hunwicke’s blog and Dcn Nick Donnelly’s enforced period of ‘reflection and prayer’; the hierarchy have clearly had enough of the tone which has crept into some traditionalist blogs. What surprises me here is that whatever anyone could say about them, both the bloggers mentioned are models of how to conduct a critical discourse, and by picking on them, the impression is being created that the hierarchy is not interested in creative and constructive criticism, but is willing to yield sioxantehuitard wet-dream of a Catholic Church which resembles the Church of England. What a good job AATW is not amenable to such requests, as our friend quiavideruntoculi has gone much further than either of those gentlemen, and his tone is, shall we say, less respectful (for the sake of the humourless, that is English understatement).
Were someone to do a word-association test with me and say ‘pigeons’ I should in all probability say ‘cats’; I have very seldom encountered an orthodox position on anything which I have not been tempted to counter; I like to work my way through to my own views. On the view that I should certainly be an early target of any censorship, I have always been an advocate of free speech; by which I do not mean the mealy-mouthed version we are now allowed by political correctness. So, I am one of the last people who would welcome others being told to cool it; yet in this case I do.
I do because it seems to me that the Cardinal is correct. We may well disagree with our fellow Christians, but saying they are not proper Catholics, or even implying it, does lack charity. I am tired, frankly, of the excuse that this is ‘tough love’; it isn’t, it is a form of superiority complex in which one Christian tells another that they are thankful they are not a poor sinner like they are; just what Jesus wanted us not to do.
The Church has a Magisterium, a teaching authority, and there is precious little point in deciding that it is deficient and that one is, oneself, far more competent than it is; little point, that is, if one wishes to give witness to the hope that is in us. That hopes does not lie in contrasting one’s own construct of what Catholicism is with what the Magisterium permits. No doubt it is intensely irritating to some tempers to see x or y ‘allowed’; but it would be better for such tempers to restrain themselves and try to understand why that might be – rather than jumping to the conclusion that the Magisterium’s understanding of these matters is in some way deficient; or, worse, that there is no Magisterium and no Pope.
No one is forced to be a Catholic or a member of the Church.. I am sure that there are liturgical shortcomings which cause some people real grief; whenever I listen to the Gospel read in Church, I long for the glory of the Authorised Version ‘ get thee behind me Satan’ is not only more evocative that ‘Be off Satan’, it gets the message across in a better fashion – ‘be off’ sounds, frankly, silly – who actually talks like that? But, if that’s what we use in Church, it is what we use.
I saw where this sort of sniping at each other got the Church of England, and I see no reason why it won’t get the Catholic Church to the same place. If we cannot refrain from that sort of thing, then we might consider giving it up for Lent. But, one las thought – this should not be unilateral.
All Along the Watchtower 
The difference in the end I suppose is between those blogs etc which are critical but constructive and do accept the Magisterium of the Church, and those blogs which spend their time wondering whether (eg) the Pope is merely an idiot or actually the Antichrist. The two specific blogs you mention, whilst often having a critical edge are clearly the work of faithful, orthodox Catholics: the irony is that their acceptance of the need for obedience probably makes them more susceptible to pressure than other bloggers who have a much greater need for reining in.
I suppose I should add that any ‘un-reflected speech lacking in charity’ on my part is nothing to do with the Ordinariate! Whilst a supporter, I too converted long before its existence.
LikeLike
Yes, I agree, it is necessary to make that distinction – and I hope that it will be made by the hierarchy.
LikeLike
That, I fear, is just the sort of language which causes the bishops to come down hard on blogs. They say Francis is the Pope, they acknowledge him as such, so they are hardly going to think such language helpful – or to regard those who use it as loyal to the Church.
LikeLike
As I say, this helps no one – except the liberals who wish to label all supporters of TLM as dissidents. If you want to help the liberals, this is the way to do it.
LikeLike
If you are a Catholic, you cannot set up your private judgment against the teaching of the Church.
LikeLike
You are setting yourself up as the judge of that. This is not how the Church proceeds. Still, you give aid and comfort to those you wish to attack, and none to those you wish to support.
LikeLike
Yes, I see you think you know how the Church works better than those set in authority above you.
LikeLike
As I say, you are free to say what you like, but not to claim you speak for the Church. You speak fir a church which exists in your head.
LikeLike
How about I stop sniping at certain traditions when these traditions cease being totalitarian? Or at least stop hitting me over the head constantly with their damn Bible book.
LikeLike
It is always hard to do what Our Lord said to do to those who abuse us.
LikeLike
I know. I just hate it whenever I am in conversation with a Protestant and they begin an attack without even trying to understand the side they are talking to. It leads to me framing and grouping Protestants all under the same boat at that point to which they say that I’ve misrepresented them. I’ve lost most, if not the entirety, of my respect for Protestant evangelicals (fundamentalists).
LikeLike
And, of course, the same thing will happen to us if we behave the same way.
LikeLike
so basically the blatant, protestant misrepresentation of the church is excusable but not when protestants are misrepresented by catholics? ugh…okay, well i guess i can see that. punching heretics doesn’t stop people from believing their lies but it sure feels good.
for the most part though, i do say i’ve done a good job of properly representing protestants.
LikeLike
C, I must admit that I am somewhat conflicted on this issue. On the one hand nobody likes to see bomb throwing because the consequences can be devastating to the vineyard: many may leave and never return. On the other, when we have prelates and priests who seem to sing from different hymnals the murkiness of the theology seems to leave one wondering what direction the Church is taking and to what end.
In the U.S. I am witnessing in my own small corner of the country a resurgence of the “Spirit of Vatican II” thoughts that were beat down and quietly withdrew from the public eye primarily by the work of Pope Benedict and others. I am seeing a new push for the old Small Christian Communities (SCC) or Small Faith Communities (SFC) which sprang forth from the Call to Action (CTA) and RENEW movements. And these movements themselves sprang from ACORN and the thoughts and ideas of social justice engineers like Saul Alinsky in the Chicago incubator.
Thereby when issues are drawn forward for scrutiny that seem incompatible with one another, it might get messy but at least it begs for answers that might drive the Church to clear the air of confusion.
Yesterday at Mass I had to endure a homily about how Christ did not know who He was until His Baptism in the Jordan and then in order to figure out what just happened withdrew to the desert to figure it all out . . . sigh!
Can’t we all just get along? Really we can’t, largely because there are so many individual gospels floating around that we are lucky to hear one that is recorded in our own Bibles. Christ will fix it – but how? Maybe the controversies are necessary in order that we get everyone back on the same page. I just don’t know.
LikeLike
One thing I’ve liked about the liturgies is specifically how the priest never gives you his theological biases during the homilies. Does not your priest know that sola scriptura is heresy?
LikeLike
You are lucky newenglandsun if you have not seen the personal foibles of individual priests pop up in your part of the country. Sadly, we have priests in my diocese that are all over the theological spectrum and if you listen carefully you can see where their beliefs lie.
LikeLike
Might be that Eastern Catholic priests haven’t yet fallen into heterodoxy. The priest is practically our equal after the liturgies. And actually attempts to come down to us. For instance, we’ll have lunch after the liturgies on Sundays in the parish hall and he’ll sit at a table with us. The deacon will start talking about his field of expertise (history) with another group of people. The boss at lunch appears to be a 90-year-old Roman Catholic woman.
Although it’s been a while since I attended a Sunday liturgy–they’re a little bit too big for me.
In the Evangelical Protestant churches I’ve been in, you could always tell who the pastor is merely by seeing him come up to other people and informing them about the church or saying hi to them, etc. Far more preaching at you his theological opinions as if they were what the Bible taught word-for-word. These were the impossible churches. Let’s see…I bought what was being taught to me at my first Evangelical Protestant church, I bought 100% without question. That led to some difficulties explaining to other non-believers what to believe about the faith. The second church I went to, I had eventually adopted Arianism and was told that this was heresy. I’d challenge the belief in Trinitarianism biblically. But Arianism they still thought was heretical and told me to go read “such-and-such” theologian on the Trinity instead. Then I questioned other things–including belief in the Bible. Eh, no one actually legitimately believed it any way, just their interpretation of it.
But god if I ever hear coming from a Catholic the same idolatrous stuff I hear coming from a Protestant about the Bible, I’ll vouch to have that Catholic excommunicated.
LikeLike
Orthodoxy, in my view has been spared to some extent the ravages of Vatican II misapplications and ‘politics’ and thus have remained more homogenous in their thinking. Currently, in the RCC tradition, we have everything from those who find everything in VII objectionable to those who want to go far beyond anything that was proposed in VII. It has always taken a while for the Church to recover from Her Councils but one would think that due to our ability to converse instantly in this age of mass media that it might not have taken this long to get everybody back on the same page.
LikeLike
in this age–people don’t do any reading!
LikeLike
You have a point: they look to the MSM for all their information. Sad really.
LikeLike
i have a liberal roman catholic friend in my biblical hebrew class who loved john paul ii for promoting women priests (despite the fact he didn’t), hates benedict xvi for doing just the opposite, and loves pope francis for promoting women priests and homosexuality and abortion (just read a piece of evangelii gaudium last night and he’s a staunch conservative).
LikeLike
Your friend needs to take up reading as a hobby 🙂
LikeLike
lol–maybe i should too. 😀
LikeLike
This was a difficult one to write, for exactly the reasons you outline. But we get nowhere by doing what some blogs do, and indeed, those blogs actually give aid and encouragement to those who wish to attack traditionalists.
LikeLike
I’m not a reader of the blogs that you linked to though i suppose you may be speaking in general. To me, the biggest problem in the on-going argument is our tendency on both sides to let our conversations become political-speak: that is, sensational name calling and the throwing around of emotionally charged words that we are used to hearing from the politicians and the MSM. Words such homophobe, racist, apostate, rad-trad, heretic etc. do little to actually speak about the issues being discussed. They only immediately discredit their opponents and does not allow anyone to take their claims seriously. If I were to ban anything, it would be the use of any such language; though, as an American, I am all for free speech. Just wish we could self-regulate.
LikeLike
I agree, and we have to remember that we are all Christians, and if we remember that, we shall all do best.
LikeLike
Amen to that, my friend.
LikeLike
As I pointed out to our friend QV, the language he holds only helps those liberals who wish to brand all supporters of TLM as disloyal sedevacantists.
LikeLike
Indeed so. Though at AATW we do not have the other side which throws the traditionalists into the fiery lake they also exist. It is time to stop with that kind of rhetoric and actually give reasoned apologetics to some serious questions.
LikeLike
My view entirely.
LikeLike
That is the problem, QVO. They have hijacked the language of the media and we are now playing into their hands as well. Satan is hard at work confusing the language that we use. It has become a tower of babel all over again and we must try to rescue the language from such people instead of adding to the confusion.
LikeLike
Heresies never go away, QVO though heretics must knowingly deny the teachings of the faith and refuse correction. That they err in their explanations or their speech is not heretical in and of itself. We need be very careful to not overuse the term and thereby strip the meaning from the word. More important is the dialogue concerning the actual point of teaching that is being violated or not.
LikeLike
As I say, it is not helpful to the problems. It might be in a private conversation with a spiritual director or theologian that you respect. In general dialogue you need to make your case as to the incompatibility of statements and let that suffice. The Church is ultimately responsible for making the claim and settling the arguments. Today the blogosphere lays claim not only to the argument (which is fine by me) but the judgment as well (which I cannot). And you have as many judgments as there are bloggers who write in this manner. It only furthers our descent into the confusion of the hour.
LikeLike
That quote had not in mind the terrible state of our confused communications in this age and the possibility of making the situation worse. We must play the cards we are dealt. I cannot go back and replay a hand from another century.
LikeLike
I think there are times when we can easily misunderstand our faith, QVO. Otherwise, why the need for a Syllabus of Errors to Councils. Cardinal Schneider has called for the Vatican to issue one on Vatican II and I agree with his analysis. If you get a chance, read his little book, Dominus Est __ It is the Lord!
LikeLike
Unquestionably that is so. But the mysteries are deeper than our understanding and do not necessarily exhaust the limits of what might could be said which is still under development. It is up to the Church to develop these teachings and bind us to them. What might at first seem paradoxical might, in fact, be a further development of these divine mysteries. We wait upon the Church to settle these issues in time. I cannot do it. At best I can only hold an opinion, or raise an eyebrow and ‘bark.’ However, my dog sometimes barks at perfectly harmless people: he doesn’t always get it right.
LikeLike
That is certainly something comes into play. We all know that our minds are darkened but even, so the mysteries of God are more than even an angel can fully grasp.
LikeLike
Indeed, I think that is what is so troubling now. Because we have some sounding the alarms and others quite content. I am of a mind to think that much of our problems are the disconnect between the bishops and the vatican and the priests from their bishops. The tend to make things sound like everything is business as normal when it is not. I can go 2 hours from my house and get the likes of Fr. Dwight Longenecker and Fr. Jay Scott Newman and yet they are surrounded by liberals who are at the other end of the spectrum and would love nothing better than to have Catholics and Non-Catholics receive the Holy Eucharist together whether they hold with the teaching of the Church or not. They are rarely, if ever, corrected but a Fr. Jay Scott Newman got clobbered by the Bishop for telling his parishioners that voting for a pro-abort president like Obama should require them to go to Confession before receiving Communion. The spectrum is wide and the sheep are scattered and look for shepherds and sadly they find very few and they are almost ostracized by their fellow priests.
LikeLike
My understanding is: ‘To commit heresy, one must refuse to be corrected. A person who is ready to be corrected or who is unaware that what he has been saying is against Church teaching is not a heretic.’
LikeLike
Just saying that the term itself is often misused and causes more confusion than help.
LikeLike
Sorry, I meant to say Bishop Athanasius Schneider (he is not a Cardinal).
LikeLike
Q, please forgive my simplistic question. Have you written to your Bishop or perhaps Pope Francis himself about your concerns and conclusions about the state of the Church?
LikeLike
I would assume that these others who have written have documented the lies they have received. Where can such documentation be found?
LikeLike
Perhaps your “nuchurch” priest found you difficult to reason with when you challenged him, could that be?
Just to be clear, I also had to change parishes due to modernist changes and I am not personally attached to Pope Francis. But I love Holy Church.
I will pray for you.
LikeLike
Yes, I agree with you, we have all been traumatized. I agree with C and SF, though, that it would be better to work things out within the bosom of the Church, and not on the blogosphere. It is not a question of denial of the facts, or denial of the seriousness of the issues facing us all. I go back to my first point, that writing to your Bishop, who may or may not be willing to jump through intellectual hoops, I have no way of knowing, would have been a good first step. Or, rather, second step, after being shown the door by your priest.
LikeLike
I can’t imagine the sorrow you must feel. I will keep you and your wife in my prayers.
LikeLike
Intelligently thought through and compassionately written, as usual, C. So glad you are here.
LikeLike
Thank you Joan.
LikeLike
sioxantehuitard
Uh ? I do not know how to speak Klingon. I tried calling Warf…..
Does it kinda mean like Doors, Beatles, Led Zeppelin and Bob Dylan and bell bottom corduroy pants and “Get out of Vietnam,Now” ?
LikeLike
Yes, that’s about it – let’s all go to San Francisco and wear flowers in our hair.
LikeLike
I am glad somebody asked about “sioxantehuitard” I was trying my best to find the definition on line and was getting absolutely nowhere. Could you please give a more clear definition for those of us (meaning mostly this silly hillbilly) can more fully understand. BTW good post.
LikeLike
Thanks QVO, makes his phrase a wee bit more understandable.
LikeLike