Amidst the Storm of Confusion
We Must Right the Ship
In the last few weeks I have heard the following from three different Catholic podcasters: Catholics are falling off the ship on both the left and the right.
There is SO much confusion in the Church right now. Election years seem to amplify this confusion to deafening levels. What did these well-known Catholic speakers mean by their statement above? Let’s start with “the ship”. The ship is the Church, the 2,000+ years of tradition and teaching, the magisterium, encyclicals, councils, and most importantly the Gospel. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, which was the first compendium of Catholic doctrine, was published in 1566. A commission was formed, under the leadership of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI), in 1985 to begin creating a new catechism. In 1992, St. Pope John Paul II promulgated the new Catechism of the Catholic Church. Despite what its detractors say, the Catholic Church makes no attempts to hide its essential teachings and beliefs, which can all be found in this document. There is, however, a great deal of misunderstanding, ignorance, and sometimes even purposeful misleading surrounding some of these teachings.
Now that we know the “ship” is the Church, let’s define what is meant by falling off the right and the left. Trent Horn equates the left with “progressive Catholics” that promote the forbidden as permissible. This means individuals are denying a doctrine of the Church while continuing to identify as a faithful Catholic. The most common examples would be social teachings commonly associated with the left in American politics such as acceptance of the use of contraception, homosexual relations, and abortion. To say that the Church is wrong to prohibit certain immoral acts is to fall off the ship on the left. This leads to a watered down faith. Those that find themselves steering the ship in this direction may be doing so to justify their own sinful behavior or out of fallacious compassion.
Trent Horn goes on to define the right as a fundamental movement that seeks to forbid that which is permissible by the Church. An example of this erroneous thinking is to link Natural Family Planning with contraception therefore forbidding the Church approved practice. There is a Rad Trad (radical traditionalist) movement happening within the Church particularly among young Catholics. There has been a rise in interest from this community in the Traditional Latin Mass, use of devotions and sacramentals such as the rosary and scapulars, homeschooling, and receiving the Eucharist on the tongue while kneeling. None of these examples are wrong, they are actually good and admirable practices, but they are not required by the Catholic Church. The “falling off to the right” begins when individuals demand that others practice something that is not required by the Church or forbid something the Church allows in order to be a faithful Catholic. This fundamentalist approach to Catholicism leads to scrupulosity, or worse. Wearing an ankle length dress and veil to Mass is a beautiful expression of humility and reverence, but I better check my heart to ensure I am not dressing this way in order to show the other parishioners how holy I am and judge them to be less holy because of their jeans and Husker t-shirt. In holding a higher than required standard for Catholics we place undue burden and make faithfulness unattainable. On his podcast, Christopher West says that it is a lack of virtue to see oneself as holier than the Church.
So why is this happening? Why do we have Catholics falling off the ship at alarming rates? In it’s 2,000+ year history the Church has experienced its share of ups and downs but let’s focus on the modern issues. In the 1960’s we saw a major culture shift thanks to sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll. I’m joking, sort of. Sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll were probably not the cause of the shake up as much as they were the effect. In response to the chaos surrounding the time, Pope John XXIII announced the inauguration of the Second Vatican Council. He hoped to preserve the doctrine of the Church while offering the world the “medicine of mercy” it needed in a time of change and great division. While the implementation of the work begun during Vatican II is still ongoing, we have been able to observe it’s effects for over five decades now.
I believe a tilt to the left among Catholics began after Vatican II. The majority of the individuals invited to participate in the Second Vatican Council held progressive opinions, and they were advocating for extreme changes to Church doctrine. Fortunately, the conservative minority were able to hold their ground to ensure the integrity of the Church. Progressive Catholics were however allowed enough space to begin pushing their agenda. The liturgical calendar was simplified, sacramental regulations softened, high altars were removed, and more priests and bishops began to openly say things like, “the Church needs to get with the times.” I have heard that phrase myself while in the confessional with a priest from the Diocese of San Diego. Organizations associated with the Church compare illegal immigrants to unborn babies when discussing the issue of life. Too many priests and bishops are afraid of being politically incorrect to speak truth plainly from the ambo. Finally, we cannot deny the confusing messages coming from the Vatican.
When a pendulum swings too far in one direction, it is only a matter of time before it swings hard in reverse. I believe the fundamentalist movement is a result of the pendulum swing. In an effort to course correct, some Catholics have overshot the mark and I have to admit that I sometimes find myself leaning over the edge. The secular world is already swimming in a deep and scary ocean of progressive ideology. As a defense, I feel that it is natural to seek refuge in tradition when the world feels upside down.
In Revelation 3:15-16 we hear, “I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.” I don’t want to be lukewarm, but sometimes we forget what God means in this passage. We are lukewarm not when we fail to pray a daily Rosary or if we stand to receive the Blessed Sacrament but when we fail to keep God in the center of our vision. When we care more about checking the boxes of our prayer routine than actually giving our whole hearts to Jesus in a deep and vulnerable relationship, we risk falling off the ship. When we believe the Church is too old and outdated, succumb to secular influences, and fall for the “He Gets Us” marketing campaign from the church of anything goes, we may have already fallen off on the left.
In his work Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis says that morality is concerned with three things:
-fair play and harmony between individuals
-tidying up or harmonizing the things inside each individual
-the general purpose of human life as a whole
We can use these three points as our instructions for staying safely on “the ship”. Step one, avoid falling to the left, we must acknowledge that being basically a good person and achieving superficial social harmony is not enough. We cannot water down the doctrine of the Church to accommodate everyone’s “truth” in a live and let live manner because the ship will sink and lead no one to salvation. Second, to avoid the right, we have to take a look at our hearts by peeling back the layers like an onion to acknowledge our shortcomings and struggles. Only then can we right the ship. When we can honestly say that God is the center of our life and Heaven is the goal of all our efforts, we have reached a proper heading.
S.D.,
You have sparked quite the fun conversation! First, I will be writing an expansion on my sister's analogy for next week's article. Second, I think the labeling of ideas is required because it is how we use words to talk about things while the labeling of people always needs to be done VERY cautiously because it can include or stray into the judgment of the heart which only God knows. Third, my sister is using "radical traditionalist" to draw a box around the idea of excluding what the Church allows. If an individual does that, then they are including themselves in that group. However, if you share other things like preference for the TLM or veiling or reception on the tongue that many self-professed or objectively fit the definition above also appreciate but don't participate in the excluding what the Church allows, then the individual is not being described by that term. So, my sister and I try to keep ourselves outside the label, as she used it in this article, while remaining very sympathetic to many of the other good things those who would fall under that label hold fast to.
I hope this makes sense, and I left a comment on your article as well.
God Bless!
Thanks for the comment S.D. Wright and for the link to your work.
First, I did not label anyone a Rad Trad, rather I referred to a movement. I have heard this term used most often by influencers that are self-identifying in this way. I did not disparage this movement. I actually tend to agree with much they advocate for. What I did point out in this article though is the line we ought not to cross, forbidding that which the Church has deemed acceptable.
You speak of dangerous language and I agree this is a problem. Some individuals that identity with the movement mentioned above have caused great harm in discussions regarding Natural Family Planning. Let's dive into their logic for a moment. When someone says that NFP is as sinful as contraception, they do not understand the Church's teaching on this matter and God's will for our sexuality. They try to use the following logic pattern: it was God's will that we have this child because this child exists therefore if we would have abstained we would have been sinning. We agree that every child that exists does so because it was God's will. However, this logic is flawed and here's why, let's apply it to this scenario: a woman is raped and conceives a child, therefore it was God's will for this women to be raped. That's absolutely absurd. God did will for that child to exist but not the evil circumstances by which it occurred. When a couple chooses to abstain they are not sinning by denying God an opportunity. There are not children that do not exist because a couple abstained. God's will and how it interacts with our free will is a mystery. When we try to be holier than the Church, we are not faithful Catholics.
You mentioned in your work that the use of the term Rad Trad is insulting yet in your conclusion you say, "Those who use this term to further their online "apostolates" and stir up controversy are bad people." I would argue, that statement isn't very charitable or just.
I am sure some have used the term as an insult. To be an insult, one must be insulted. Jesus tells us in John 15:18 "If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first." I look forward to our continued dialogue. These are important conversations.
May you have a blessed day!