"More Catholic Than the Pope" — New Book Responds to Arguments Raised by Extreme Traditionalists

Envoy Encore Weblog ^ | 07-30-04 | Patrick Madrid

[Patrick Madrid]

Catholic canon lawyer Peter Vere and I have co-authored a new book critiquing the claims and controversies of extreme traditionalism that will come out in September, published by Our Sunday Visitor Publishing.

Written in a popular and accessible style, More Catholic Than the Pope provides a detailed analysis of and response to common arguments raised by extreme traditionalist Catholics (in particular, adherents of the Society of St. Pius X) against the Second Vatican Council, Pope John Paul II, the fact that the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre committed a schismatic act by illicitly ordaining four bishops in 1988, and more. Chapters include a history of the SSPX, a background on the controversy between the SSPX and the so-called "Conciliar Church," and answers to several standard canon-law and historical arguments often raised by extreme traditionalists.

Our hope is that, by God's grace, the evidence presented in this new 224-page book will inform, encourage, and strengthen Catholics who have been shaken or confused by the misguided arguments raised against the Catholic Church by some extreme traditionalists and, with regard to those who have adopted a schismatic mindset, that this book will help them recognize the errors of extreme traditionalist groups, help them to see why they should abandon those errors, and help them come home to the Catholic Church.

Additional details on More Catholic Than the Pope will be available soon at Envoy Encore weblog.

[sinkspur]

In your quote, he didn't name sedevacantists. He'll likely include them too.

He might also go after the "Catholic integrists," like Ferrara, and Michael Matt and his whole Remnant and "we resist you to your face" crowd.

Many of them attend SSPX Masses, but call themselves "traditionalist Catholics" and spend their lives trashing the Pope and the Church.

[Viva Christo Rey]

Oh yes, that's correct. Vere has written repeatedly about his debt to his mentor who has now been defrocked as an admitted homosexual abuser. "Adoremus" wrote about how Vere's ex-priest homosexual mentor was a one-man wrecking crew destroying the Catholic liturgy all across the United States from his base in Canada.

This same 'mentor' [COUGH] is the source of the 'SSPX is schismatic' garbage that Vere is now pushing as his own.

[Maximilian]

our side did not raise the issue to begin with.

"Your side" -- which includes Peter Vere -- decided that you felt comfortable placing yourselves in the position of attacking traditional Catholics and deciding who is really Catholic.

[pascendi]

"We'll see how he defines "extreme traditionalist." I have a feeling it's going to be more than those you name." More than a safe bet, I'd say.

[Maximilian]

It is more and more evident that despite your claims to the contrary, your membership in the Church of Rome is tenuous, at best.

More self-proclaimed inquisitors who are willing to excommunicate other Catholics! I see you fit in nicely with Madrid, Vere and the rest of the neo-Catholic inquisition like Karl Keating. You might think your tag line is funny, but really it is a damning indictment of your own hypocrisy and pride.

[mattcabbott]

It would seem so.

[pascendi]

"The posters on this thread, who are against the Pope, thrive on scandal."

Betcha if I ask you specifically what you mean when you say "against the Pope" that you wouldn't be able to state exactly what you mean by that.

What in particular are they against? When the truth comes out, it'll be that they're simply against modernist assaults on doctrine and destruction of the liturgy.

What else could it possibly be?

[Arguss]

Well, I see I've brought you to an impass, and exposed you for the Marxist tool (useful idiot) that you are.

I do commend you for admitting it though.

[pascendi]

"He might also go after the "Catholic integrists," like Ferrara, and Michael Matt and his whole Remnant and "we resist you to your face" crowd."

There you go: Catholic Integrists. Another term promulgated not by the magisterium of the Catholic Church, but a concoction of the new LayMagisterium.

[Maximilian]

Vere wrote these comments before the details about his mentor's past became general knowledge. Vere was as surprised as anyone else.

Yes, but he was still the same person. We must assume that Vere didn't know about the sexual attacks on novice seminarians, but he did take his direction from a man who was in fact committing these attacks, and who was the kind of man who would do these things, since he did in fact do them. Moreover, his liturgical destruction was public knowledge. His visits to American diocese were well-publicized events. His private life may have been unknown, but no one could claim to be unaware of his public life.

As most North American canonists are aware, his mentor was more of a liturgical libertarian than a liturgical liberal.

Is this supposed to be a good thing? Sorry, but that is not traditional Catholicism by any means. Ultimately in the long run ,"liturgical libertarianism" is bound to be just as destructive as "liturgical liberalism," even if some small quotient of traditionalism is mixed in. And it causes more intellectual confusion. Better to have a clear distinction -- and a clear choice -- between tradition and liberalism.

[sinkspur]

Well, I see I've brought you to an impass, and exposed you for the Marxist tool (useful idiot) that you are.

LOL! So now, anyone who thinks conspiracists are "out there" is a Marxist?

Be careful Arguss. Don't eat dinner tonight.

The fork you use might have been made by a Mason.

[GratianGasparri]

Well if he was wrong about Fr. Huels, then it's more than possible he may be wrong in his book about the good people called traditional Catholics as well.

Well, I'm not going to argue with the first part of your comment. As one of his classmates, I warned him against taking up Huels' position -- especially against the well-known conservative canonist Fr. William Woestman.

Unfortunately, Vere was convinced that Huels was right in asserting that Ecclesia Dei applied to all seven sacraments, and that Woestman (who argued it only applied to the Mass) was wrong. The reason I advised Vere not to side with Woestman was two-fold: 1) I thought Woestman was right, and 2) Traditionalists are a cranky lot who would reject any association with Huels, even when he was advancing their position. Of course, neither of us had any knowledge of Huels' past at the time, but I just sensed that traddyland would be ungrateful for what Huels did to help his traditionalist students like Vere to advance the indult.

Although Huels has now been vindicated with regards to #1, as even Woestman has come over to Huels' side of the debate, my warning concerning #2 has more than come to pass. Had I been Vere, rather than defend an expanded use of the indult, I simply would have switched sides and backed Woestman and the conservatives.

[pascendi]

Well, when y'all get done goofing off, maybe you could knock some heads together and get the traditional Latin Mass back into the parishes and get rid of this burden called the Novus Ordo Missae. That is, assuming that the prelates are going to keep doing nothing like they have been, and leaving the fate of the Church in your hands.

At any rate, don't forget to bring the Deposit of Faith with you when you go to work fixing everything for us. =)

[GratianGasparri]

We must assume that Vere didn't know about the sexual attacks on novice seminarians...

None of us did. We all held Huels in high esteem, even though we did not always agree with him. Huels was a great teacher who treated everyone fairly. The traditionalists (and keep in mind that Vere was one of about four or five in his class) all shared Vere's respect for Huels because he treated them with respect, was objective in terms of grading, and traditionalists tended to rank at the top of his class. In time, the other profs came to appreciate the traditionalists in the programme, but Huels was the first to really reach out to them. So pretty much everyone from the class will say the same thing -- they are very disappointed by what it turns out Huels had done, but they continue to respect him as a professor of canon law.

Is this supposed to be a good thing?

No. And you won't get any argument from me here. As I mentioned in another response, I warned Vere and the other traditionalists at the time that allowing the liturgical libertarians to defend the traditionalist cause would later come back to haunt traditionalists. (Although admittedly, I never envisioned it would happen like this.) While it would have taken much longer for the indult to gain footing (think Europe), it would not have raised as many eyebrows.

[Bellarmine]

Do you think the book will include Fr. Huels argument that an inudlt is required to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass?

[GratianGasparri]

Well, when y'all get done goofing off, maybe you could knock some heads together and get the traditional Latin Mass back into the parishes and get rid of this burden called the Novus Ordo Missae.

Not being a traditionalist, it's not my problem. And seeing how Vere, who happens to be one of the biggest promoters of the indult within the canon law world, often gets traddy knickers in knots, I have no intention of making it my problem.

[ninenot]

Judica me,

Et discerne causa mea de gente non sancta

That means the excommunicandi...

Where's the documentation? YOU claim that the entire Hierarchy "has strayed." You mean they are apostate?

[ninenot]

Don't take my word for it, rather read the words of Cardinal Ottoviani

I've read it. Ottaviani NEVER said that the Sacrifice was 'flawed' in the proposed NO, nor would he EVER state that it IS "flawed" in the current NO.

To do so, of course, is heresy.P>Further, as you should know, Bugger Bugnini was banished--and his friend, Rembert Weakland was banished, too, causing white martyrdom for a whole LOTTA Catholics in Baghdad and Milwaukee.

So what?

THEIR banishment has nothing whatever to do with the liceity OR the validity of a Canonized Rite.

[ninenot]

it's time to resort to psychotropic drugs.

Usually at that point, I resort to a quart or two of Black Jack. Cheaper, and better results.

[pascendi]

Let me ask you a very simple question.

Why is so much effort being put into this?

The seeds of the solution to all problems are so simple. It's so unbelievably simple.

The pope simply needs to use the Chair and say: Hey, this isn't working. We've strayed from the Deposit of Faith. We've allowed our liturgy to be trashed. My bishops have, in all likely, simply lost the Faith. Others scandalize the world. My flock knows virtually nothing about their Faith, and they believe even less. We're courting false religions who in turn defile our own House. Today, this all stops, because I'm the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church, and enough is enough.

But no, we have to have people debate over the size of the scraps thrown from the discussion table to the dog traditionalists.

You do realize how stupid this all really is, don't you?