The doctrinal inversion at the heart of the post-conciliar Church December 18, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition.
Good piece from Pat Archbold. I’m out of time, hope you enjoy. I add a few comments:
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. [I agree. I try to avoid the term, too, because it originated as an insult. But I was one by default 5 years ago, as are many other well-meaning people who simply have not grasped the deadly intellectual inversion at the heart of the post-conciliar Revolution, which Archbold makes clear below]
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……
……..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. [And in certain episcopal sermons] 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.
That’s precisely it, and beautifully put. The humanist revolution at the heart of Vatican II is irreconcilable with the First Commandment. It disfigures everything it touches, and it touches everything. With the elevation of Christ’s second commandment above the first, there is no end to the Revolution nor the deformation of the Church.
And yes, there are people who see many problems in the Church but refuse to see the inversion at the heart of it. They are to be more pitied and deplored, even given all the damage they may help rationalize if not realize.
In short: different religion.