Laudetur Iesus Christus!
Nunc et in æternum! Amen.
I hope you all had a very blessed First Sunday of Advent! Just a reminder so y’all can’t play stupid: this Saturday (8 December) is the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the patronal feast day of our nation. It is a holy day of obligation. The obligation has not been abrogated this year. The next day is the Second Sunday of Advent, also a holy day of obligation (like every single Sunday of the year). Going to Mass on Saturday at any time (including the evening) fulfills the obligation to assist at Mass for Immaculate Conception. In order to fulfill your Sunday obligation (more like privilege), you must assist at Mass on SUNDAY!
There is no double-dipping when it comes to Holy Mass and one’s fulfillment of our duties as practicing Catholics. Ever. If anyone caterwauls about having the “problem” (again, more like privilege) of “having” (as if worshiping God is some kind of drag) to assist at Holy Mass two days in a row, tell them, as Father Acervo put so very delightfully bluntly: “… disciples don’t whine … and then give them the schedule for confessions[.]” Oh snap.
Anywho, moving on …
There has been one thing that keeps coming up in my conversations with friends of late: double standards, in the Church especially.
I have been on the receiving end of it of late though it’s kinda dialed down more recently. The merde really hit the fan a few months ago and because of that merde meeting the fan, I learned who my real friends were and those who were playing me in one way or another. Some of them being people whom, for many years, I thought I could trust. Of course, as one of my dear priest-friends oft-reminds me: Christ is the only one Who does not change. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever and He is the only one Who will never disappoint us.
The double standard in the Church that I have noticed and so many of my friends have noticed as well is the selective “hospitality” that is shown those of us who tend to be traddy when it comes to how we practice our dear Catholic Faith.
And by “traddy” I do not mean “rad traddy” … that’s just dangerous. I know people who are rad trads, decry everything and anything that came out of the Church following the Council (typically condemning it as “modernist” … and they are not joking like I do). I always wonder if all of that’s true if they see all the Popes following Blessed John XXIII or even Venerable Pius XII as validly elected Popes and rightful successors to Saint Peter. Those persons who do not believe that there has been a validly-elected pope since either of those two Holy Fathers (though the really rad trads tend to see Pius XII as the last one) are known as sedevacantists because they believe the seat (sede) is empty or vacant (vacante) because of the infiltration of modernism (and you can’t forget the Masons!) into the Church which led those in charge to espouse heretical things that negated their Catholicity and thus their ability to occupy the Seat of Saint Peter.
No, I am talking about the traddy people who: attend TLM often, ocassionally, or exclusively because it is their preference (while not decrying the validity of the Novus Ordo Missæ); have a great love for the Church’s musical heritage in the form of time-honored hymns, Gregorian chant, polyphony, etc.; believe that Latin ought to have pride of place (along with Gregorian chant) in the liturgical life of the Church (you know, because Vatican II did say that), and just plain love the more traditional devotional practices that were sadly lost in many places with the erroneous hijacking of the Council in the time following until today (like Forty Hours Devotions, Perpetual Help Devotions, women veiling, etc.).
Those are the persons about which I am speaking.
Don’t you love how many in the Church (esp. some in her leadership) seem to bend over backwards to appease the “social justice” C/catholics (who have a tendency to somehow, in their convoluted quasi-logic, divorce the right to life from the rest of the corpus of Catholic Social Teaching) even going so far as to accomodate their errors and their de-emphasis of issues that the Church sees as important by saying that their stances are perfectly valid or by staying silent/apathetic/having blinders on (but at what cost?!).
These are the same people who poo-poo, rolls their eyes at, and generally make the lives of traddy Catholics a penance of sorts in itself.
When a group of traddy Catholics want to resurrect traditional devotional practices (having it all planned with minimal effort from the priest/pastor), they are told that such things are “not necessary anymore” or “no one would come” (though there is a demonstrated interest in it on the part of many of the faithful who are not necessarily trad).
When a Catholic woman, who isn’t eligible for her AARP card and didn’t live during the time when it was mandated by the 1917 Codex Iuris Canonici (Code of Canon Law), discerns the call to veil (and that’s what it is … a call of sorts) and is treated like crap. She is told that she has a fixation with the veil (that’s what I was told), for things she didn’t even experience firsthand when they were mandated (got that too), and that she is doing it just for attention (because, you know, they can read minds and hearts … God complex and ego trip, much?).
Oh, and when some traddy Catholic (layperson, cleric, w/e) brings up the Latin Mass (and not necessarily the desire to have one at the parish), they are looked at like a Plague-infested anathema as if they are some enemy of the Church or, more accurately, an enemy to their personal view of what is “all right” to be done within the Church.
And, lest I forget, when there is someone who wants to kneel to receive Communion (on the tongue … *gasp*), they are looked at like they are walking backwards and speaking the Devil’s language. When they want to receive Communion on the tongue (while standing so as to not draw attention to themselves or because they can’t physically kneel) they are looked at like a freak of nature or, totes wrongly, told they cannot do it for this, that, or another reason. Or no reason at all.
Never mind that many of those things are rights in one way or another in the Church:
-The practice of veiling was never expressly abrogated in the 1983 CIC (I use the Latin abbreviation for the Code of Canon Law) though it was never mandated (let alone mentioned): Therefore, if a Catholic woman, regardless of her age, wishes to veil, there should be NO problem or hullabaloo made of it. It is her right to choose to wear it or not wear it. She should not be kept from doing nor should she be forced to do it. Anyone who urges/forces either extreme is superseding their rightful “ability” whatever their position in the church.
-Every Catholic has the right (and is in fact encouraged) to receive Communion on the tongue and/or kneeling. Actually, receiving on the tongue is the norm (not sure about the kneeling part though I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the norm too) and receiving in the hand is considered extraordinary (I won’t get into my horror stories). In fact, if you are in Rome for Mass with the Holy Father and you are so privileged to receive Our Lord from him, you must do so kneeling and on the tongue.
So yeah, if anyone tries to keep you from kneeling to receive Communion or from receiving on the tongue, know that they have no right to do so. The whole “Communion in the hand” thing is, as I mentioned, the extraordinary schtick. The Church in the United States had to get an indult from Rome to allow it. In other parts of the world, you won’t see that though it has become prevalent in other places as well (like Italy). There are many in the country who are seeking for this indult to be rescinded because of the rampant irreverence shown to and sacrileges done to Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament (I *may* be part of that group).
I guess these people (those who condescend and persecute trads) think they are “more Catholic than the Pope” since our dear Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, wrote this little motu proprio called Summorum Pontificum that allowed for what has been called the “universal indult” for the Missal (and sacraments) as they were in 1962: any priest can offer the TLM or celebrate the sacraments in what is now called the “Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite” (the Novus Ordo still being the ORDINARY Form of the Roman Rite) without permission of his bishop (before the motu proprio, it was required and some bishops sadly abused their power by banning it flat out though there may have been sizable and sustainable interest in it in their diocese).
NEWSFLASH: THE CHURCH DID NOT BEGIN IN 1965 NOR DID IT END IN 1962 (Just so we’re clear, rad trads)! It started on Calvary and at Pentecost!
Please explain to me why those members of the faithful (their actual authentic membership is a topic of contention in many circles) who err from the inalienable teachings of the Church (such as the fundamental right to life, the all-male priesthood, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the authentic interpretation of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, etc.) are welcomed and accommodated like they were the best thing since the last Haugen-Daaz CD came out while those of us who are solidly faithful to the teachings of the Church in her fullness and without diluting who happen to have a deep affinity for the traddy things of Holy Mother Church are treated like metastasizing tumors that must be removed immediately because of the “danger” they pose to the Church (more like their personal agendas).
I just don’t get it. Why is being a trad such a big deal? I mean, traddy-ness was the norm up until about fifty years ago. I think trads have the history thing on their side. For sure. Definitely. I mean, if I were talking about the rad trads who think they are “More Catholic Than the Pope” (yep, that’s a book on … rad trads) then I would say “Yes, there is much error there and a lot of myopic thinking” but I am not. I am talking about your run of the mill trad who loves Latin, the TLM, and the traditional practices of the Church while still being faithful to the Church (and recognizing Vatican II as a legit council of the Church and the validity of the papacy of all the Popes preceding and proceeding the Council).
Why does it seem like some in the Church are willing to accomodate this:
and this …
But they cannot endure this …
and don’t seem to show much appreciation for things like this …
Now, I am NOT saying that all leaders in the Church are not appreciative of the traddy things (I know of priests and bishops who are VERY trad-friendly and faithful). I am just talking about those in leadership who seem to be complicit (either expressly or by their silence/implied apathy) to those who are not faithful to the Church and her teachings (along with her liturgical standards and rubrics) while decrying those who are traddy and who are faithful to the Church in all her teachings and liturgical rules (Yes, you can be an orthodox Catholic and not be traddy but I am just sayin’.).
Just had to get that off my chest.
All right, I have to get ready for Catechism in a bit. Have a few things to do before I head out. It’s been foggy up the wazoo today and a bit on the cooler side. Thank the Lord for my new puffer jacket that I got redonk on sale at Parisian!