Skip to main content

A Grand Inversion at the Heart of Neo-Catholicism - The Remnant

+
JMJ

I have just received my first issue of The Remnant and I recommend that everyone obtains a subscription.

The existence of a good Catholic Press informing and providing insight to this crisis is essential.

Mr. Archbold's article gives a good outline of what is known as Cognitive Dissonance and the challenges it presents.  No one tries to be subject to cognitive dissonance, confirmation biases etc.  It is just a result of our constitution.

Anyone can fall prey to these mental fallacies.

Humility is the first step to overcoming the biases that hold us prisoner.  This cannot be had without a at least a healthy, if not strong, spiritual life.

A broad perspective from good reading is the capstone.


P^3

Courtesy of The Remnant

A Grand Inversion at the Heart of Neo-Catholicism Featured

Written by  
Salvador Dali's The Human Face (Look Again)Salvador Dali's The Human Face (Look Again)
I don’t care for the term neo-Catholic, for it is too often used as pejorative.  For this reason, you will not often find the term in my writing, not least for the reason that I was frequently accused of being one.

The term neo-Catholicism actually has a meaning, even if that precise meaning is frequently ignored.  Generally, the term refers to Catholics that take their faith seriously, but generally don’t have a problem with the Church of the last 50 years, even embracing changes that have proven themselves disastrous.

Well, that wasn’t me, not entirely.  Prior to my traddification, I certainly recognized the significant problems in the Church.  Further, I recognized the rupture that occurred during and after the council that gave rise to the neo-Catholic Olympic-level sport of hermeneutical gymnastics.  But even as I recognized these things, it was hard for me to put my finger on the root cause.  As it turns out, to some degree I too was infected by the same virus as many neo-Catholics. However, unsure of the proper diagnosis, my efforts at a self-cure were sometimes helpful and sometimes not.

So it is that I have spent much time pondering the questions of why I was able to see the problems of NuChurch, that I wanted nothing more than to be orthodox and faithful, but spent so much time in unhelpful pursuits.

Have you ever seen one of those images that at first glance seem like one thing, but after some time another image emerges?  I remember one time I saw a knit image in someone’s home that on first glance seemed like a blocky maze pattern.  I saw it several times before I realized that the spaces between the maze walls formed the name JESUS.  Once I saw Jesus in the maze, I couldn’t un-see Jesus in the maze.  From then on it seemed so obvious that it was all I could see when I looked at the image.  I couldn’t see the maze anymore.

In similar fashion, once I realized the true difference between the ways I saw things before and the way I see them now, I cannot un-see it.  In fact, it seems so obvious now; I am chagrined that I missed it before.  As it turns out, there is one simple cause to all the problems that we see in the Church and the promoters of those problems are not shy about telling us about it.

When people ask me about why and how I changed, I tell them about the grand inversion.  It is the one thing that separates otherwise well-meaning neo-Catholics from understanding how they in some ways contribute to the problem.

Several wise traditional commenters have focused on the problem present in Pope Francis’ Evangelii Gaudium #161 "...above all the new commandment, the first and the greatest of the commandments, and the one that best identifies us as Christ’s disciples: ‘This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you’..."

It is easy for Catholics reared on and fed modernist Catholicism to look at the above and not see the problem.  I mean, who is against loving your neighbor?

But contrast it with how Jesus actually answered the question and the problem starts to reveal itself.


Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments."  —Matthew 22:36-40 (see also Mark 12:28-31)
See that?  There are two separate commandments in order of importance.  First "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment."

Catch Patrick's regular column in the print-edition of The Remnant


As you can see, NuChurch has inverted the order.  First, NuChurch put love of God on a par with love of neighbor, as if they were one command.  Love of neighbor, they would have us believe, is equal to love of God.  But as can be seen from EG161, even that is not enough.  Pope Francis, avoiding Jesus’ direct answer to the question, answers the question with another quote entirely, purposely avoiding love of God, not just as the primary commandment, but dropping it altogether in favor of the love of man.

This simple, but pernicious change is at the heart of NuChurch.  Any Catholic from a century ago would understand that the love of God comes first and that love of neighbor, which derives from the first, is secondary.  But now man is first and the love of God is a secondary to loving man, instead of the other way around.  This is the grand inversion that is at the heart of NuChurch.

But don’t take my word on it.  Listen to Pope Paul VI address this very question in 
his closing remarks from the Second Vatican Council:

"It might be said that all this and everything else we might say about the human values of the council have diverted the attention of the Church in council to the trend of modern culture, centered on humanity. We would say not diverted but rather directed." 
It is right there from the beginning.  This error, this inversion of the Truth of God’s command is at the root of all of it including our man-centered liturgy, false ecumenism, indifferentism, and the false mercy of the current pontificate.  They believe that the only love that matters is the love of man.  Yet the Council of Trent takes a very different approach.
"Moreover, no honor, no piety, no devotion can be rendered to God sufficiently worthy of Him, since love of Him admits of infinite increase. Hence our charity should become every day more fervent towards Him, who commands us to love Him with our whole heart, our whole soul, and with all our strength. The love of our neighbor, on the contrary, has its limits, for the Lord commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves. To outstep these limits by loving our neighbor as we love God would be an enormous crime." —Catechism of Trent, Part 3, Chapter 5, Question 5
So ingrained has this inversion become in NuChurch, that when a Catholic puts the love of God and his commandments first as he always should, he is derided by no less than the Pope himself as a rigid and unmerciful Pharisee.

But once you see this inversion and understand it for what it is, your entire approach begins to change and your neo-Catholicism can no longer be sustained.

So what changed for me?  I realized that love of God is the first and primary commandment and Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments."  And I realized that in order to love my neighbor, I must help them to keep God’s commandments too.

So I saw it.  I don’t how or why, but I saw it. God’s grace is everything. Then what do you do?  Well you try to put God first in every aspect of your life and you try to do the same for the Church by shouting it from the rooftops.  And you fight against the ongoing process of making man the center of our religion.  You fight against a false mercy that rejects the first commandment.  You fight, because you love God.  And only when you love God first, can you truly love your neighbor, even if your neighbor hates you for it. ■

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is Tradition?

 + JMJ What Is Tradition? The basic premise, from my perspective, is that what was taught before cannot be contradicted by the 'present' magisterium, only deepened and expanded upon. I recall the Roman theologians called the SSPX protestants while the SSPX called them modernists.  I believe this was all surrounding the concept of Traditon. SSPX's Understanding of Tradition One accusation made against the SSPX is that they don't have a correct understanding of 'Tradition'.  This is how the SSPX understands Tradition: I finally profess that Tradition is not a dead memory, but the living transmission of the doctrine received from the Apostles. It remains living, in distinction to Revelation, which is closed. It is so both in the activity of the Magisterium of the Teaching Church and in the profession of Faith of the Church Taught, of which the sentire cum Ecclesia is the result of the teaching of the Magisterium. Tradition may be called ‘living’, not in the sense t...

SSPX.ca: What is the position of the SSPX on Vatican II???

 + JMJ With all the mis-information about the SSPX rejecting the Second Vatican Council, I thought it would be useful to publish an article that focuses on the real issues that the SSPX has identified. Update: Why Did the SSPX Consecrate Bishops? ( Neither Schismatic, Nor Disobedient link ) In the linked document the SSPX outlined the key motivation and core issues with Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium (see above link for full document): 4. The Society Acted Precisely Because of the State of Necessity in Which the Faith Finds Itself  In the present situation of the Church, if the Society of Saint Pius X had not carried out the consecrations of July 1st, it would have found itself facing an inevitable alternative: either to disappear gradually, or to accept, at least in fact, the new liturgy as well as the false doctrines of Vatican II and the post-council. Without the consecrations of July 1st, the Fraternity would have found itself, in a few years, without bishop...

Thoughts on: Finding Common Ground Between Rome and the SSPX

 + JMJ In the ramp up to the consecrations the noise floor in the intergnat grew to a constant din.  This was one of the few the peeped its signal over the noise. https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/finding-common-ground-between-rome-and-the-sspx The key issue is contained in this paragraph: In the lead-up to the planned July 1, 2026, episcopal consecrations,  the SSPX rejected Rome’s offer  of doctrinal dialogue on the grounds that “we both know in advance that we cannot agree doctrinally, particularly regarding the fundamental orientations adopted since the Second Vatican Council.” Fr. Pagliarani also said that his previous attempt at dialogue in 2019 was shut down by Rome because of an assumed irreconcilability. It seems that, from the Society’s perspective, and perhaps from Rome’s too, their positions are incompatible. If memory serves, Rome killed any opportunity for an open discussion by stating that Vatican II was not up for debate. So it was a still-birth and ...

The News is an Addiction ...

 + JMJ People seem to be mesmerised by train wrecks.   They just can't turn away as the disaster creeps forward along train tracks towards the crossing where a car, truck, bus, trailer awaits its destruction. Trads have been watching the train wreck that is this crisis of the Catholic Church for decades. The trade war between the Canada and the US has reminded me that the news is addictive.   The first time I was addicted what from 2009 to  2014 when I was closely following the Rome / SSPX discussions.  I was at work watching a live-stream as Bishop Fellay disappeared into the Vatican. The lead-up to this moment had been intense as the 'resistance' got freaked out and the cultural cracks between doctrine and conspiracy theory widened. In the decade since then other things have emerged, wars, rumours of wars, conspiracies, celebrity Catholics etc. Now we have a new addiction and its name is Trump. Lately, no matter how much I try, I find myself wonderin...

Thoughts on the Thoughts of a former SSPX priest

 + JMJ Well Gary Campbell, former SSPX Priest and now laicised has posted a new article on WherePeterIs. https://wherepeteris.com/thoughts-of-a-former-sspx-priest-on-the-july-1-consecrations/ These words stuck out: Heck, they have built a five-star hotel, wine bar, and Walmart on the opposite bank of the Rubicon! They are not in danger of entering a state of schism, for they are  already  in a state of schism. I believe he doth protest too much. All the actual facts indicate that the SSPX was not in a state of schism before July 1st and an examination of the decree of excommunication highlights the either ineptitude of those in charge or a desire to leave the barn door open. The chasm between an act of disobedience and act of schism remains just what is has always been - an inconvenient barrier that person(s) in Rome seek to bridge but appear incapable of succeeding. The SSPX re-stated that they recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and feel obliged by conscience...