I’m still disappointed and annoyed at Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Cap., for the inexplicable and, frankly, ignorant attack on the Traditional Latin Mass some time back, together with two other writers who ought to know better. Many of us still scratch our heads over that. What was the motive? Pressure? Desire to curry favor? It couldn’t have been real knowledge about the issue. Anyway, their attack was completely refuted. Best to leave it behind.
That said, Weinandy has a piece today at The Catholic Thing. In effect, he retraces his steps to 2019 when he wrote a piece called “Pope Francis and Schism”, wherein he predicted dire things for the future and made a statement which surely got him into trouble… (is that why he wrote that attack?)… with the powers that be. Weinandy suggested that Francis was in schism with himself, since he is out of synch with what popes do.
Now, before the “Walking Togetherity” about to slither on its pre-determined way, Weinandy extends his remarks. First he reviews. However he adds this about Americans, whom Francis seems to dislike in general and comment on in sweeping terms of rash judgement.
First, Pope Francis’ dislike for and criticisms of the Catholic Church in the United States have intensified. As I noted in the earlier column, the American Catholic Church is the foremost critic of Francis’ often theologically ambiguous statements. Over the past four years, as Francis’ ambiguities have proliferated, often given in mid-flight and off-the-cuff, so has criticism of his statements and ecclesial policies mounted.
This ever-growing critical response, from multiple outlets and spokespersons, comes not so much from the American clergy, but from the American Catholic laity. In no other country is there such an educated laity, men and women who are faithful to the Church, as in the United States. Francis has found it impossible to respond to this theological and philosophical challenge from American lay Catholics – other than by calling them rigid and backward-looking.
But the American Catholic laity have not been, are not now, and will not in the future be bullied into silence. Such verbal ridicule is merely a sign that this pontificate is not intellectually prepared to engage the issues, and so has already lost the scholarly battle.
This is a good insight. I like the use of the word “bullied”.
It is interesting that Benedict XVI very much liked Americans and how the American Church had worked within a secular society.
The piece is short. Go read it.
Finally, this book pertains to the attempt by some to build up the Council by bashing tradition.
Loading ...
Pingback: TVESDAY AFTERNOON EDITION – BigPulpit.com
A great concern of mine follows.
As with the ridiculous defense of Francis’s incoherent death penalty “change” by Bishop Barron who described it as “eloquent ambiguity”, I find pervasive in so-called “Conservative” Catholic discourse the idea that “ambiguity” is not just preferable to heresy, but that it’s very existence in doctrinal documents is acceptable and defensible. Thus there is nothing wrong with Vatican 2 docs or others up to this very day.
The fact is that the Church long ago condemned theological ambiguity right along with clear-cut heresy. (EX OMNIBUS AFFLICTIONIBUS; Errors of Michael Baius, 1567, AUCTOREM FIDEI, 1794, etc.)
This fallback by so-called “Conservatives” among the hierarchy frustrates me more than the existence of outright heretics who we know will appear but should be aggressively resisted by every man-jack among the prelature who considers himself orthodox. Instead, we have 50 years of “Behold the serpent” a la Synod of Frankfurt which is now manifested in theological incoherence like “inadmissible” and the recent vague permission to bless homosexual unions. All of which allow, permit and encourage aberrant doctrines practices.
While “Conservatives” claim “no Church teaching is changed” and things are just fine anyhow.
What we have here is a Treachery of Images…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images
The Treachery of Images is a 1929 painting by Belgian surrealist painter René Magritte. It is also known as “This Is Not a Pipe” and “The Wind and the Song”.
Bully is the only thing that comes to mind when I think of Francis. He came to Canada, agreed with a lie and bullies those who disagree. The Francis effect for many has been sadness, fear, hurt, confusion and let down. He is without intending it making more Traditional Catholics all the time. I’ve seen it many times now myself, people are looking for a more orthodox parish in liturgy and belief in spite of Francis.
As a Canadian, I say, God Bless the USA! God Bless the many good American Catholics who go have helped so many people worldwide. America still has heroes the world needs.
Fr. Weinandy’s post seems very schizophrenic to me.
On the one hand, saying that the Catholic Laity in the U.S. will not be bullied into silence, yet refusing to outright accuse Pope Francis of being a bully.
It reinforces what I read in an article over on 1P5, called “Fr. Altman, Pope Francis, and the Traditional Catholic Father Wound”.
https://onepeterfive.com/altman-francis-father-wound/
@TonyB
The conclusion I draw from Fr. Weinandy is that many Bishops and Priests ARE bullied because of the recent frequency of cancellation or, for bishops, demand of resignation. I believe his point and his call is for the lay faithful to stand and up and do something since they are harder to silence and remove through administrative actions.
It’s a sad state of affairs: “Help, sons! The daddies are being bullied!”
“Unfortunately, in this troubling situation, various ultra-conservative Catholic individuals and groups have condemned Pope Francis outright. This is not only unfair to him, but it also obstructs any way forward.”
Huh? Unfair? So he sacks and deposes anyone (if he can reach them) who even hints that they might not be all on board the Francis train, but legitimate and reasoned opposition is “unfair”?
And it “obstructs any way forward”? What “way forward” is possible? It’s his way or the highway and if you don’t get onboard the train will run you down.
I do not trust this Fr. Weinandy. He makes some good points, but he also seems confused.
In His woes in Matthew 23 Christ denounced the Pharisees for not practicing what they preached. In Mark 7 He accused them of using human traditions to avoid God’s commandments with the practice of Corban. The progressive modernist wing of the Church appears to be attempting to use human tradition in the mold of Corban to enact their agenda.