“Irony is dead…”

Someone recently asked me, in not so many words, “Don’t you think it’s a little ironic for you to post a papal teaching (and again here) against ‘hyphenated Catholicism’ when ‘traditionalist’ Catholics insist on their own special qualifier?”

I agree with the objection, which is why I am on record as having forsworn the title of a “traditionalist Catholic”. Hence, while there is a dogmatic necessity in being “pro-Tradition” simply by virtue of being Catholic, this does not entail that one must employ special “brand names” for oneself. Our duty is simply to maintain the bonds of faith, worship, and government by holding fast to the fullness of the Magisterial Biblical Tradition. From there we can let the querulous Catholic apparatchiks try to pigeonhole us for their own petty aims.

Indeed, I think the only reason there’s been a proliferation of hyphenation in the Church, is because there are deep, unresolved tensions between the majority of the Church’s lived Tradition and the pastoral aggiornamento which Vatican II tried (and keeps trying and trying and trying) to effect. This is not to suggest that “all our problems started with Vatican II,” but is simply to say that Catholics feel more balkanized than ever because the Second Vatican Council fostered an unprecedented pluralism about every issue in the Church. As a result of this panoply of ill-defined perspectives and preferences, the faithful have no choice but to grab onto this or that “aspect” of the Church, like castaways salvaging whatever they can from the good ship Vatican 2.0, which has been beached for decades on the shores of the Isle of Conciliar Monomania. The Church is no smaller than Vatican II (sorry, SSPX), yet She is also so much larger than that one council.

As things stand, however, the influence of Vatican II is grotesquely disproportionate relative to the entire scope of traditional Catholic praxis. The great paradox is that, by being a council about everything, Vatican II has become a council unto itself, rather like a type-II (!) supernova which implodes under its own hyper-reactive supermass. All that remains is a black hole which bends all ambient light and information (or traditional piety and theology) around itself before destroying them in its super-dense maw. If I may indulge the conceit a little further, I think this description of stellar evolution by NASA is most illuminating:

In general, the larger a star, the shorter its life, although all but the most massive stars live for billions of years. When a star has fused all the hydrogen in its core, nuclear reactions cease. Deprived of the energy production needed to support it [i.e. deprived of an immersion in the larger life of Tradition], the [conciliar] core begins to collapse into itself and becomes much hotter. Hydrogen is still available outside the core, so hydrogen fusion continues in a shell surrounding the core [I’ll take the New Springtime for $500, Alex!]. The increasingly hot core also pushes the outer layers of the star outward [to the peripheries, you might say], causing them to expand and cool, transforming the star into a red giant.

If the star is sufficiently massive, the collapsing core may become hot enough to support more exotic nuclear reactions [especially in the clerical higher ranks] that consume helium and produce a variety of heavier elements up to iron. However, such reactions offer only a temporary reprieve [Quick, somebody organize another synod!]. Gradually, the star’s internal nuclear fires become increasingly unstable – sometimes burning furiously, other times dying down. These variations cause the star to pulsate and throw off its outer layers, enshrouding itself in a cocoon of gas and dust [I couldn’t have said it better myself]. What happens next depends on the size of the core.

No crew can navigate by a single star, no matter how large and radiant it is, nor can any ship keep moving when the crew constantly hears contrary, and even contradictory orders. Unless we want to keep treading water in the kiddie pool of conciliar navel-gazing, there must be a dogmatic resolution of the pastoral resolution for which Vatican II was convoked in the first place. Two esteemed advocates for such a resolution are Bp. Athanasius Schneider and Msgr. Brunero Gherardini, though I am sure there is no shortage of zealous laymen, standing behind every jot and tittle of the non-dogmatic-because-merely-pastoral-yet-pastoral-and-therefore-dogmatic conciliar documents, who will be happy to put those clerics, among others, in their rightful place (i.e. back in the cellar with the boot marks still smarting on their faces). Because remember, it’s only acceptable to publicly criticize our pastors when they are of a “traditionalist” bent, or, worse yet, betray a “crypto-Lefebvrian drift.”

About The Codgitator (a cadgertator)

Catholic convert. Quasi-Zorbatic. Freelance interpreter, translator, and web marketer. Former ESL teacher in Taiwan (2003-2012) and former public high school teacher (2012-2014). Married father of three. Multilingual, would-be scholar, and fairly consistent fitness monkey. My research interests include: the interface of religion and science, the history and philosophy of science and technology, ancient and medieval philosophy, and cognitive neuroscience. Please pray for me.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to “Irony is dead…”

  1. Tony Jokin says:

    I once used to frequent the Catholic Answer Forums. While on there, I once stated to someone that there is no such thing as “Traditional Catholicism” and that every Catholic should be Traditional. There was all of a sudden some very severe back lash. I held my ground and defended. I got an infraction and a temp ban for what the mod described as stating things contrary to the wishes of the Popes today where there is complete freedom to follow tradition or not.

    Aside from that, I really hope this particular crisis will resolve itself even if it not be in our life time. It feels kind of lame for this crisis to continue in this magnitude till the second coming. It feels like the anti-Christ will have the work cut out for him with all the confusion caused by the Church if this continues that far.

  2. Proph says:

    Tony, your experience at CAF sounds pretty true to form for that place based on my own experiences. Truly amazing, given how loudly and frequently the mods trumpet the rule of charity, how ready they are to attribute statements like yours (really utterly uncontroversial) to bad faith and nastiness. What is especially laughable is that another poster there, Brother JR, regularly says the exact same thing (“we are all supposed to be ‘traditionalists'”) and is not censored, because he says it in a way that signals his pro forma acceptance of whatever-Vatican-II-means-this-Papacy.

  3. Augustine Thomas says:

    They have another word for “traditionalist” that I like better: orthodox.

  4. Augustine, you nefarious neo-Pelagian hyphenating-Catholic, you!

  5. drprice2 says:

    Mr. Thomas seems more “bat-like” to me, Elliot.

    Is he also afraid to dance?

  6. Either way, Dale, CATHINFORM has it’s all-loving Eye on him. He has been warned.

Be kind, be (relatively) brief, be clear...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s