Yeah, what they said – Matt and Ferrara on the crisis and faithful response March 24, 2015
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Christendom, General Catholic, Latin Mass, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the return, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership.trackback
I’ve got to agree with most everything said in the video below. The only question it left me with was whether asking for our Church back is the right response, or is it simply to take it back, without “asking?” No, I’m not entirely sure what that means, either.
The video below came out on Saturday, but I didn’t get around to watching it until last night. So, to some it may have seemed that posts yesterday were just singing this same tune, but I was ignorant of the similarities in argument. Having said that, I’m very glad to see the similarity in opinion displayed below. I also feel the bit of exasperation with trying to appease all the different factions among faithful/orthodox/traditional Catholics, an impossible and frustrating task. You can’t do it, the only approach to take is a big tent, inviting in all people of good will who are willing to take part in the fight to restore the Faith. Excluding this group because they are not of my tribe or that person because, well, they aren’t on board with all my dogmatic prudential judgments…….as has been passionately argued in the comments of recent posts, good luck with that. I guess some folks would prefer their doctrinal purity to an improved shot at really aiding in the restoration of the Church:
You know, one thought that crosses my mind from time to time – I try to keep it out, but it likes to return – is whether some of these folks who seem to have a bit of addiction to rageohol and the excoriation of foreign tribes don’t really rather prefer the Remnant, whatever that means to them, to be small, and for there to be essentially no earthly chance to restore the Faith. I pray that’s never the case with anyone, but sometimes I see such closed mindedness it really seems hard to just explain as adherence to some ideological position. Then again, ideology is an incredibly powerful thing, as Pope Francis frequently reminds us.
Video is probably old for most folks so I won’t load it up with a bunch of commentary, other than to say it’s very, very good and I am gratified that there are very good, dedicated souls out there who seem to agree with my overarching point of view.
Yes, in other words, it’s all about yay me! But that’s what you come here for, no?
Comments
Sorry comments are closed for this entry
A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics 
Is it just me or does Michael Matt look like Kieth Olbermann?
It’s just you.
I think he makes an excellent point when arguing that the ORTHODOX CATHOLICS must put aside their differences and work together for the the good of Holy Mother Church. If we do not stand together then absolutely there will be only a skeleton of the Church left when my grandkids grow up…. But satan is happy to keep us divided, to appeal to our personal pride.
That is what we are talking about here, including wishing a nice day to those who insist on resisting an aggiornamiento between the groups. So what do we do to move it past the blogging phase and into the active phase? Those who prefer to continue fighting among themselves, well, can’t we just let them do what they are determined to do anyway? Maybe if we got something serious going we would discover what a small percentage they are anyway.
And you are so right, Baseballmom, it is pride that drives these divisions.
I tried to avoid looking at motives, but since it’s been said, I agree, by and large.
Absolutely. And I understand there can be some difference of opinion on what constitutes orthodox. But I think it to our benefit that we try to be as open-minded as possible, and find allies in all those who are willing to work against the revolution in the Church.
I don’t think anyone has the moxy to deal with the problem.
And I just deleted a few paragraphs of what I think would help the situation. It wasn’t pretty. But, hey, I’d do it for my kids and grand kids. Sometimes you have to fight to make your opponent know you mean business. I don’t care if you wear a miter.
The Matt/Ferrara video makes many an excellent point about uniting in the battle; I see a major obstacle however in the way that people self-identify with one or the other of the many groups (tribes?) that must be brought together in order to succeed. The monikers “Traditionalists”, “Traditionalism”, “Traditional Catholic”, “Orthodox Catholic” all too often imply a prideful exclusivity that is damaging to the cause.
The only way to fight effectively is under a single uniting banner. Both Matt and Ferrara used it off-and-on in their dialogue. So please drop the divisive language of self-aggrandizing tribal names. Lets all call ourselves what we strive to be: FAITHFUL CATHOLICS and march on into the war.
There is a lot of wisdom in what you say, Peter.
Many of us are not fond of the term “Traditional Catholic.” One reason, among others, is that it suggests that there is anything other than a “traditional” Catholic. Can a person who rejects Holy Tradition legitimately claim to hold the Catholic Faith?
But we use it because it saves a lot of explanation.
To differ just a bit with you, I have to say that I have not seen all that much exclusivity around the “traditional” Catholics I know. In fact, most of those I know have a real charity toward those trapped in the novus ordo and toward non-Catholics.
Where my experience does resemble yours is specifically among those who have this “tribal” loyalty you describe. IMHO they are the ones that cause the entire “trad movement” to gain a reputation for exclusivity, pridefulness and lack of charity.
Let’s go ahead and name the major tribes: SSPX and FSSP.
Most of us have a reason for preferring one over the other, but I think most of us are able to realize that, as Tantum said in another post, these “make or break” issues are nothing more than prudential judgment raised by those that hold them to the level of dogma.
None of us are so idealistic as to think that every single person who identifies themselves as “traditional Catholics” is going to give up these pet issues that cause such intransigence. But what we know from our own experience is that most of us are.
While we sit around in our marginalized communities and disparage each other, those who would keep us marginalized sit in the positions of power, collect our money and destroy the Church. “Traditional” priests who fan these flames and that minority of the Faithful which pursues all of this with such determination need to be ignored and we need to cease contributing to them just as we would cease contributing to CCHD. We are never going to get them past all of this, but we need to move past them.
Ah, yes, move forward, not backward. Mess it up. Let’s take him at his words and do just that. The bigger the mess, the more notice we’ll get. But, make sure we make the mess outside our tribes; not inside.
Dismas, I identify very much with your characterization of the tribal ‘traditionalists’. I disagree though that they are in the minority of those who self-identify as ‘Traditionalist’. I make the following points:
1. A Faithful Catholic by definition accepts and reveres Holy Tradition.
2. The exclusivity of traditionalism (and resentment of same) is seeded in the mind of the listener by a tribal person or official pronouncement and is then assumed to be an artifact of the genre unless otherwise explained away by the casual user of the term.
3. In this way, use of the term by the non-tribal person requires a lot more explanation than would a simple self-identification as FAITHFUL CATHOLIC. Even if an explanation of FC is required, such a discussion would be positive in nature vs. an explanation of ‘traditional Catholicism’ which would be defensive in nature and not entirely dismissive of the residue of exclusivity. To test this,write down the definition of Faithful Catholic alongside however many definitions of Traditional Catholic (as seen by one or more of the members of one of the tribes e.g. SSPX, FSSP, sedavacantists, etc.) that you can conjure. The result is a myriad of definitions that in a dictionary may require more space than Webster would agree to allocate. This is the source of the internecine conflict within the ‘traditionalist’ movement and of the ongoing protestentation of same.
Back to my original point: Unite under the banner of FAITHFUL CATHOLIC – under which all, including the so-called tribal adherents, can join the battle.
Peter, I am with you. The fact that your experience in all of this differs from mine is meaningless. Moreover I am personally not concerned with whatever name one wishes to put to it. I simply would like to see those “Faithful Catholics” of goodwill come together and address the real enemy within the Church instead of constantly putting each other down.