Sunday, October 2, 2016

How Can Traditionalist Catholics Criticize the Hierarchy?

How Can Traditionalist Catholics Criticize the Hierarchy?

Michael Voris, et al have been insisting, since the infamous Synod on the Family, to not criticize the pope.  The bishops yes, but not the pope.  E. Michael Jones or a "Catholic in Brooklyn" blogger type go further, insisting to not criticize the bishops period.

misconception-hierarchy.png (579×347)
                            
                              An INVERTED Conciliar Hierachy 

On the contrary, when Catholic priorities become universally and systematically inverted throughout the institutional Church, such that the Cult of God subtly morphs into a Cult of Man, then we know the organizational forces in the hierarchy--oriented vertically by divine design--have become reversed in a downward direction.

Distortion of the Title of Pope as "The Servant of the Servants of God":

Romano Amerio, in his 1000 page book on changes in the Catholic Church in the 20th Century, highlighting the Vatican II conciliar reform in the Church, pointed out the irony of convoluting one title for pope: "The Servant of the Servants of God." (Iota Unum).  He argues its meaning has become inverted.  Traditionally, this title signifies the Pope as the Chief of Servants God, with the bishops under him also being Servants of God.  The conciliar misrepresentation of the title instead portrays the pope as chiefly servant of the bishops, who themselves chiefly serve the priests, who themselves chiefly serve the "People of God."

With that mindset, its not surprising when the conciliar hierarchy becomes INVERTED.  What was always held most important (God) now becomes least important.  What is now deemed "most important" is the divine-like dignity of man in all his earthly splendor.

1*LMHKdOMIjnugDIpx6unqpw.png (556×468)

It would take a historian and master of theology to adequately disentangle this convolution, but its Saturday night here in Oklahoma and I'm enjoying the late hours of evening, so what the heck, I'll give it an amateur's shot from my Okie Armchair.

Before Vatican II:

Before Vatican II, the monarchical constitution of the hierarchy was practically preserved.  The Pope acted chiefly as God's visible representative and Guardian of the Faith, leading everyone beneath him in the hierarchy upwards to Christ in heaven.  Going down the ladder, each bishop did the same for his local flock.

After Vatican II:

invert.gif (400×228)

But after the Revolution took over almost every nook and cranny throughout the Universal Church, a diabolic and systematic reorientation took place.  Remember, this happened before in the Early Church with Arianism.

The pope has surrendered most of his rights and supreme authority to a collegial system.  The pope now in servile fashion must follow ever-plotting Vatican bureaucrats.   For trads, this is an established fact in plain sight.  Among some trads however, there's confusion whether or not we can actually discuss this in the public sphere.



Going down the conciliar hierachy--or rather UP the inverted hierarchy--the Vatican becomes subordinate to the National Conference of Bishops, who rule over national diocese's with a psychological tyranny.  Their protocols and guidelines are handed down to each local bishop as if they were law (they aren't). Its mind control from the national level.



In turn, the local bishop becomes obliged to invert the divine, hierarchical order of his own local church, answering to a "presbyteral council" that 99% of the time is progressivist.  



Following the inversion downward, or rather diabolically upward, the parish priest becomes subordinate to the parish council which designs the liturgy and social ethos of parish life.  What the parish council must answer to are the families who expect a "faith community" that is pleasant and socially nurturing for their children, regardless of orthodoxy or adherence to Church tradition.



Lastly, we have the parents over their children, or rather under their children.  The old model (2,000 year old model) of Catholic parenthood forming children to become saints, has been replaced everywhere by the liberal worship of children. Its the error of the Enlightenment French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau that man is born entirely innocent, and is most pure in the state of an undeveloped child.  That sentiment rules over modern parents' minds.  The absolute, preciousness of little children becomes the supreme ideal.

Conclusion:

When today's Hierarchy becomes inverted, such that in a very real, practical, and universal way:

Children rule over Parents...who rule over Priests...who rule over Bishops..who rule over Popes..who at times even rule over Christ introducing heretical provisions (cue Pope Francis' official allowance for Divorced-and-Remarried-without-Annulment Catholics to receive Holy Communion), then, drumroll please...

animal_drums.jpg (445×243) 


YES, of course, you're darn tootin', every Catholic has a right to publicly criticize if not also resist modernist bishops, or even a modernist pope!




13 comments:

  1. Dom Prosper Guéranger:

    "When the shepherd becomes a wolf, the first duty of the flock is to defend itself. The true children of Holy Church, at such times, are those who who walk by the light of their Baptism, not cowardly souls who, under the pretext of submission to the powers that be, delay their opposition to the enemy in the hope of receiving instructions which are neither necessary nor desirable."

    2 John 1:

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its hard to imagine the shepherd becoming a wolf, but I imagine even in Dom Gueranger's time it was happening.

      Delete
    2. Hard to imagine??

      Delete
  2. There is nothing more to say about your post but: "I agree."

    It is well documented of a Catholic's privilege and right to criticise even the pope, as Paul did Peter, and no one - esp. Mr. Voris - should force non-existent scruples upon anyone for doing so. It is Voris's and others prerogative not to criticize, but neither should ever call to the carpet those who do so out of Charity and defense of the Faith.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with ya Dave. I think the Voris mindset disregards acting on virtue in response to a modernist pope. If the moral principle "virtus stat in medio" is true (ie. that "virtue stands in the middle" between 2 extremes), then true obedience avoids both disobedience to the left, and blind obedience to the right.

      The Keep Silent attitude to me seems like a knee jerk, fear-based swaying to the right into blind obedience, perhaps sometimes unintentionally. Its more of a disposition that the modernists take advantage of to shut down traditional Catholicism.

      Delete
  3. 2 John 1:

    "Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine, hath both the Father and the Son. If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him, God speed you."

    ReplyDelete
  4. Vatican II sucks.

    ReplyDelete
  5. May Almighty God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost obliterate Vatican II.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks for your insightful article.
    I've been seeing so many parents today putting their children 1st almost as if they are gods or more important than God. Its very annoying to hear them screaming and running around at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and their parents fail to correct them. It seems as if the priests are afraid to say anything to them, probably because their bishops have informed them that you ALWAYS make the children and their parents feel welcome, no matter what! It's kind of like following that lie that the customer is ALWAYS right! They are afraid to lose parishioners and young families and any money along with them. However, the others in the Church suffer as they try to concentrate and pray while all of the unhindered nonsense is going on during the Mass. The parents have little to no respect for Jesus on the altar or for anyone else in the church. They only seem to idolize their little Johnny or Sally without any concern for Jesus or the Mass or anyone else. The people in the church may turn around and give disapproving looks, etc., but the parents should already have been taught proper manners and should know better. I've thought about talking to the priests about it or writing to the bishop, but doubt that will go very well. I wonder if any parents would listen if I took them aside in all charity and explained the situation. I can't imagine that they don't realize that their precious ones are disturbing the Mass and the people at Mass! They'd have to be deaf, dumb, and blind not to notice. I guess I'll pray about it all first.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your thoughts Praypraypray! Your point reminds me of my boyhood parish priest (Novus Ordo), a very conservative religious who said the Novus Ordo with reverence.

      Even though the parish had a cryroom, often parents still let their kids yell and scream during Mass. Even during the homily. Father eventually decided to actually STOP Mass until the parents took their kids to the cryroom or outside. He said it was because the noise was irreverent to the Mass.

      Delete
  7. "Who is going to save our Church? Not our Bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops like bishops and your religious act like religious”

    "If abortion is not wrong then nothing is wrong." - Mother Teresa

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks George. I'm curious, who said the first quote??

      Delete
    2. Looked up the quote. Archbishop Fulton Sheen said it! I guess he was a "rad trad." lol

      Delete