Posted on 07/14/2014 11:38:21 AM PDT by BlatherNaut
Fr. Dwight Longenecker, posting on his“Standing on my Head” blog (appropriately named given the frequency with which pontifications seem to flow so freely from his other end), recently suggested that traditionalists (aka Catholics) are “getting old.” Obviously, he’s never been to a “traditionalist” gathering to witness the overwhelming presence of young, often quite large, families.
“Not only are they dying out,” he wrote, “but their ideas are dying out.”
It isn’t immediately clear what “ideas” he has in mind, but presumably he is speaking of such notions as the Social Kingship of Christ as taught with such stunning clarity by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas, the reality of Christian unity as taught by this same Roman Pontiff in Mortalium Animos, and last but not least, the Mass of all Ages, the devotees of which he has castigated as unstable for daring to drive considerable distances to assist at such a liturgy.
Fr. Longenecker went on to opine:
Fifty years after the revolution of the Second Vatican Council we are moving on from the tensions it created. Those tensions existed because Catholics kept comparing the pre-Vatican II church to the post-Vatican II church. The ones who did this most were the folks who went through the Vatican II revolution … Everything was viewed through that lens. Well, at least we agree on one thing; the Second Vatican Council was a revolution.
Where I and every other reasonably well-formed Catholic parts company with Fr. Longenecker is his preposterous assertion that those who cannot help but draw comparisons between Catholic life before Vatican II and the bitter realities of the present crisis are necessarily “the folks who went through the Vatican II revolution,” and they are the reason tensions exist over the Council.
Does Fr. Longenecker believe that to be Catholic, no matter one’s age or personal experience, is to view everything through the lens of all that preceded us?
Does he hold the firm conviction that ours is the Faith that comes to us from the Apostles; not just the faith of the most recent “pastoral exercise” or the currently reigning pope?
Does he fully embrace the reality that this faith is immutable; may never be believed to be different, and may never be understood in any other way?
Apparently not, which actually makes perfect sense if you stop to consider his background:
Brought up as an Evangelical. Dwight Longenecker graduated from fundamentalist Bob Jones University. While there he became an Anglican and after graduation went to Oxford to train as an Anglican priest. After serving for ten years as an Anglican priest he converted to the Catholic faith with his wife and family. Eventually he returned to the United States to be ordained as a Catholic priest under the special provision from Rome for married former Anglican clergy. (Amazon.com bio) Is it just me or does there seem to be something missing from this curriculum vitae; namely, any kind of training in Catholic theology and protestant deprogramming?
In any case, I suspect, and Fr. Longenecker himself may very well admit, there isn’t a snowball’s chance in Hell he would have swum the Tiber if awaiting him on the other shore was the “pre-Vatican II church” circa all the way back to 1958.
This raises yet another question: Did Fr. Longenecker convert to the Catholic faith whole and entire, or did he convert to some protestantized (read: distorted) conception of the same?
Clearly, it is the latter. Remember what he said:
Fifty years after the revolution of the Second Vatican Council we are moving on from the tensions it created. You see, only the protestant mind can conceive of a “revolution” in the Church in such terms; as if the revolution isn’t a problem in and of itself, but only the tensions created by the recalcitrant few who just can’t seem to let go.
Indeed, it may well be that the vast majority of converts over the last fifty years, priest or otherwise, more properly converted to a protestantized conception of “Church” and not necessarily to the Faith in its fullness.
It’s not necessarily their fault.
Think about it: One who embraces with gusto every word that has come forth from the mouths of the last five popes would have at least one foot in Protestantism. Obviously, Fr. Longenecker does, and this even as he stands on his head.
No, some people just hate everyone but especially their self which is evident in their constant whining about the horrible experience they once had. You know the type, they didn’t get the flavor of ice cream they wanted when they were six years old and are now scarred for life.
Amen. Oh, how I miss Benedict: but I realize he is praying for the Church with all his heart and soul.
Father Longenecker is a very orthodox priest and is despised by liberals.
I’m not sure what you mean.
I think this is an example of what sitetest is saying. The sedes and the National Fishwrappers march in ranks with each other to the drum-beat of "There is no hermeneutic of continuity."
There's a strange symbiosis here.
Have you seen the plans for the new building they're working on? The fact that he and his flock agree that their new building should stand out as obviously being a Catholic Church speaks volumes about where Longenecker is coming from.
Having followed the same lonely, dusty, road, I have sort of soft spot for people who pretty much "read their way" into the Catholic Church by studying the Bible and reading the Church Fathers which, I gather, is at least a part of how he came to Catholicism.
“To be deep into history is to cease being protestant”.
Cardinal John Henry Newman
Actually if you really knew what you were talking about, you would know that this is incorrect. But I get that most here don't have a clue about sedevacantism. Neither did I.
WDALYIC?
Then they probably know my wife, she was the secretary there for 13 years. Father Longenecker is a good and holy priest who probably posts too much just like the rest of us. :)
Oh my. Now when have you ever spoke that way to the Protties here?
Guess you’re taking after your pope: protestants good, trads bad.
I said “if”.
Wow. Does she per chance speak Vietnamese?
Lol no, but I understand why you'd ask. OLR has a very strong Vietnamese community.
"Bearing in mind this article of faith, theology today, in its reflection on the existence of other religions and of other religious experiences and on their meaning in God's salvific plan, is invited to explore if and in what way the historical figures and positive elements of these religions may fall within the divine plan of salvation."
Non-Catholic religions fall within the divine plan of salvation. Now where have I heard that before? That's right: Vatican II.
Benedict XVI had modernist views as well. He's not the Traditionalist he's been cracked up to be.
As best I've ever been able to tell, sedevacantists are actually PROTESTANTS. However, they are terrified to be called Protestants, so they invented a bizarre theory that the Holy See has been "vacant" since the death of Pope Pius XII.
Now, here are just a few of the issues that arise from their stance:
1. How and why EXACTLY did the Holy Spirit decide to, for lack of a better term, abandon the Conclave in 1958 where Pope Saint John XXIII was elected?
2. If the Holy See was "vacated" in 1958, why did it take another decade (e.g. after Vatican II) for anyone to recognize this "vacancy"? 3. Why did Cardinal Siri (who many of these Protestants believe was actually elected pope) remain obedient to Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II? In fact, ALL of the cardinals at the 1958 would remain obedient to John XXIII and subsequent popes.
4. How EXACTLY to the various sedevacantist groups (like all other Protestants they have experienced numerous schisms where groups have divided based on their own personal interpretations of Scripture and Tradition) propose to "restore" the Holy See that they claim is vacant? Do these self-appointed "bishops" intend to hold their own conclave and choose a pope from among themselves?
Now, I and all other traditional Catholics have had issues with changes that the Church has undergone in the last half century. However, we also hold our Lord's promise that the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church. We recognize that many things have happened through history that, though they are guided by the Holy Spirit, seem wrong at the time. Unfortunately, the sedevacantist branch of Protestantism is responsible for guiding many good Catholics into apostasy and this is unforgivable because it can often lead to blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
Whatever such folks tell themselves to rationalize away the fact that they're really Protestant, their theory about there having been no legitimate Pope only holds water because they deny the power of the Holy Spirit and assert that Christ didn't mean what He said when He promised the gates of Hell wouldn't prevail against His Church.
Personally, I believe anything that requires me to deny the perfection of the Holy Spirit is without a doubt a lie.
And straight from Satan.
Which says more about you and the author of this garbage than Fr. Longenecker.
...okay, sport, why don’t you tell me all about myself, since you can glean so much from one little quote...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.