Champions Of The Faith
(Lead Editorial The Wanderer)
The Church has always had her champions, courageous and prophetic men who have defended the Faith with a holy passion. Men willing to fight for orthodoxy, regardless of the wrath they incurred. Men, often saints, filled with hope, faith, and charity. Men with their fair share of bitter enemies, incurring animosity in direct proportion to their espousal of the truth.
Today's Church has bred its own unique "champions," men who comply doctrinally with Rome, yet go no further than this mere compliance. Men hesitant or unwilling to commit wholeheartedly to the militant and prophetic spirit of the Faith. Men who stifle God's enduring call to heroic witness sanctity, in favor of a superficial and safe tranquility.
Why do those commissioned to champion the Faith, essentially priests and bishops, quaver in response to the prophetic call? Much of the reason behind this widespread shirking can be found in the quality of contemporary seminary formation. Within this formation two intimately related factors can be isolated as the root of the problem: first, an erroneous and deficient philosophical/theological formation; and second, a corresponding deformation of character.
The philosophical/theological error stems from the secularization of the Catholic intelligentsia. This secularization has brought to the seminaries and universities professors with Modernist ideas contrary to the Faith. Fundamentally, these ideas spring from egalitarianism with its errors of compromise and from subjectivism with its tenor of uncertainty.
Briefly, the doctrine of egalitarianism is that all men have an equal right of opinion, and that majority opinion rules. It promotes compromise as an intellectual and moral virtue. The principle of subjectivism maintains that truth is in the eye of the beholder, with any attempt to ascertain objective truth seen as either inadequate or totally futile. The combining of egalitarianism and subjectivism creates a mental attitude and moral disposition repellent to authentic Catholic ideology.
Subjectivism necessarily excludes the intellectual element of certitude that flows from mental assent to objective truth; certitude being a crucial intellectual element of Catholicism. This deficiency produces a mental attitude of uncertainty which effectively eliminates moral conviction; the necessary moral attribute required to preach the Gospel. Finally, this lack of conviction results in a moral hesitancy.
Hence subjectivism is characterized by hesitancy. Such an attitude is readily observable in the Church today, be it in the moral laxity of the confessional or in episcopal inaction regarding heretical theologians and public sinners (for example pro-abortion politicians). This subjectivism combined with an egalitarian attitude (such as the Church must be wrong in classifying contraception as a mortal sin, since polls indicate that the majority of Catholics practice it) undermines essential intellectual convictions required by a supreme and indefectible magisterial Church.
The second factor, character deformation, is both the result of the egalitarian/subjectivist intellectual attitude, and a positive process conducive to it; a vicious circle. Emasculation, in various forms and degrees, is the specific product of such a deformation. Emasculation is a fatal debilitation for a leader, be he the head of a home, a parish, or a diocese. A leader requires not only the moral conviction that comes from a properly formed intellect, but also the courage and independence to implement his convictions, even in the face of adversity.
Implementation of Catholic convictions requires courageous Catholic men. Yet inculcation of Catholic manhood is done via the cross, an ingredient blatantly missing from the formation of today's pampered seminarians, the practice of asceticism and mortification having gone the way of meatless Fridays and Eucharistic fasts.
When courageous and visionary leaders issue forth from the seminary, they do so in spite of it, not because of it. The seminary system produces bureaucrats, men that "get along," while it weeds out strong individuals; especially those with an orthodox vision. T he net product is a dependent and cowed cleric. Likewise, the priest who rises to the rank of the episcopate is, more often than not, one who thrives in a bureaucracy; he is the consummate company man. No wonder our bishops are unwilling to take bold stands in championing the Faith. No wonder the Church is ridden with clerics of compliance.
Hence the seminaries are directly responsible for the dearth of true champions of the Faith. By its promulgation of tainted teaching and its rejection of solid dogmas as well as its program of character deformation, the seminary succeeds in producing results opposite to its intended mission.
So it is understandable if, not excusable, that our modern would-be champions view orthodoxy as a position of compromise and avoidance of the extreme. For them the orthodox position is the same as the safe position. Under the guise of a bastardized charity they judge all things by the new standard of tolerance, and any confrontation, even if it stems from conviction to the truth, is to be avoided if
possible. T hey reduce the Faith to a popular sociology of the lowest common denominator, for they imagine a popular, consensus Christ; a Christ without the cross.
Such an intellectual orientation results in a twisted concept of Catholicism and virtue. In this view the moderate position becomes the orthodox position. The old virtues are replaced with the new virtues, such as concord, amiability, or tolerance.
But true orthodoxy is not safe. It is inherently radical, and therefore dangerous. It is uncompromising even unto death. It tenaciously adheres to the truth, the promotion of which is disruptive. In place of tolerance orthodoxy manifests true charity; a charity unwilling to forfeit truth for apparent peaceful accord, for it is unwilling to forfeit an immortal soul for an earthly tranquility. Catholic orthodoxy does not seek to change God's reality, but embraces man's painful plight, and redeems it by preaching Christ crucified.
Catholicism requires men who desire not compromise and safety, but rather truth and martyrdom: Men willing to preach Christ in His entirety regardless of the consequences. Though such men appear to be favored and promoted by His Holiness Pope John Paul II, the Church still has too few authentic champions of the Faith. She urgently needs men who will not just adhere to the letter of the law, but who will wholeheartedly surrender to 2000 years of magisterial majesty giving themselves over to the Spirit and manifesting this Spirit in prophetic witness. She needs men willing to extend the aura of orthodoxy that surrounds definitive doctrine, thus ensuring it s pristine preservation, while advancing the spirit of truth through a militant interaction with the world.
Lead Editorial in The Wanderer 12/27/90
(Lead Editorial The Wanderer)
The Church has always had her champions, courageous and prophetic men who have defended the Faith with a holy passion. Men willing to fight for orthodoxy, regardless of the wrath they incurred. Men, often saints, filled with hope, faith, and charity. Men with their fair share of bitter enemies, incurring animosity in direct proportion to their espousal of the truth.
Today's Church has bred its own unique "champions," men who comply doctrinally with Rome, yet go no further than this mere compliance. Men hesitant or unwilling to commit wholeheartedly to the militant and prophetic spirit of the Faith. Men who stifle God's enduring call to heroic witness sanctity, in favor of a superficial and safe tranquility.
Why do those commissioned to champion the Faith, essentially priests and bishops, quaver in response to the prophetic call? Much of the reason behind this widespread shirking can be found in the quality of contemporary seminary formation. Within this formation two intimately related factors can be isolated as the root of the problem: first, an erroneous and deficient philosophical/theological formation; and second, a corresponding deformation of character.
The philosophical/theological error stems from the secularization of the Catholic intelligentsia. This secularization has brought to the seminaries and universities professors with Modernist ideas contrary to the Faith. Fundamentally, these ideas spring from egalitarianism with its errors of compromise and from subjectivism with its tenor of uncertainty.
Briefly, the doctrine of egalitarianism is that all men have an equal right of opinion, and that majority opinion rules. It promotes compromise as an intellectual and moral virtue. The principle of subjectivism maintains that truth is in the eye of the beholder, with any attempt to ascertain objective truth seen as either inadequate or totally futile. The combining of egalitarianism and subjectivism creates a mental attitude and moral disposition repellent to authentic Catholic ideology.
Subjectivism necessarily excludes the intellectual element of certitude that flows from mental assent to objective truth; certitude being a crucial intellectual element of Catholicism. This deficiency produces a mental attitude of uncertainty which effectively eliminates moral conviction; the necessary moral attribute required to preach the Gospel. Finally, this lack of conviction results in a moral hesitancy.
Hence subjectivism is characterized by hesitancy. Such an attitude is readily observable in the Church today, be it in the moral laxity of the confessional or in episcopal inaction regarding heretical theologians and public sinners (for example pro-abortion politicians). This subjectivism combined with an egalitarian attitude (such as the Church must be wrong in classifying contraception as a mortal sin, since polls indicate that the majority of Catholics practice it) undermines essential intellectual convictions required by a supreme and indefectible magisterial Church.
The second factor, character deformation, is both the result of the egalitarian/subjectivist intellectual attitude, and a positive process conducive to it; a vicious circle. Emasculation, in various forms and degrees, is the specific product of such a deformation. Emasculation is a fatal debilitation for a leader, be he the head of a home, a parish, or a diocese. A leader requires not only the moral conviction that comes from a properly formed intellect, but also the courage and independence to implement his convictions, even in the face of adversity.
Implementation of Catholic convictions requires courageous Catholic men. Yet inculcation of Catholic manhood is done via the cross, an ingredient blatantly missing from the formation of today's pampered seminarians, the practice of asceticism and mortification having gone the way of meatless Fridays and Eucharistic fasts.
When courageous and visionary leaders issue forth from the seminary, they do so in spite of it, not because of it. The seminary system produces bureaucrats, men that "get along," while it weeds out strong individuals; especially those with an orthodox vision. T he net product is a dependent and cowed cleric. Likewise, the priest who rises to the rank of the episcopate is, more often than not, one who thrives in a bureaucracy; he is the consummate company man. No wonder our bishops are unwilling to take bold stands in championing the Faith. No wonder the Church is ridden with clerics of compliance.
Hence the seminaries are directly responsible for the dearth of true champions of the Faith. By its promulgation of tainted teaching and its rejection of solid dogmas as well as its program of character deformation, the seminary succeeds in producing results opposite to its intended mission.
So it is understandable if, not excusable, that our modern would-be champions view orthodoxy as a position of compromise and avoidance of the extreme. For them the orthodox position is the same as the safe position. Under the guise of a bastardized charity they judge all things by the new standard of tolerance, and any confrontation, even if it stems from conviction to the truth, is to be avoided if
possible. T hey reduce the Faith to a popular sociology of the lowest common denominator, for they imagine a popular, consensus Christ; a Christ without the cross.
Such an intellectual orientation results in a twisted concept of Catholicism and virtue. In this view the moderate position becomes the orthodox position. The old virtues are replaced with the new virtues, such as concord, amiability, or tolerance.
But true orthodoxy is not safe. It is inherently radical, and therefore dangerous. It is uncompromising even unto death. It tenaciously adheres to the truth, the promotion of which is disruptive. In place of tolerance orthodoxy manifests true charity; a charity unwilling to forfeit truth for apparent peaceful accord, for it is unwilling to forfeit an immortal soul for an earthly tranquility. Catholic orthodoxy does not seek to change God's reality, but embraces man's painful plight, and redeems it by preaching Christ crucified.
Catholicism requires men who desire not compromise and safety, but rather truth and martyrdom: Men willing to preach Christ in His entirety regardless of the consequences. Though such men appear to be favored and promoted by His Holiness Pope John Paul II, the Church still has too few authentic champions of the Faith. She urgently needs men who will not just adhere to the letter of the law, but who will wholeheartedly surrender to 2000 years of magisterial majesty giving themselves over to the Spirit and manifesting this Spirit in prophetic witness. She needs men willing to extend the aura of orthodoxy that surrounds definitive doctrine, thus ensuring it s pristine preservation, while advancing the spirit of truth through a militant interaction with the world.
Lead Editorial in The Wanderer 12/27/90