When I was an assistant pastor, I called an altar boy “Monsignor” because he resembled his uncle who was a Monsignor. After three days of such name-calling, he couldn’t take it anymore. He pronounced a bold disclaimer: “I’m not a monsignor, I’m a Catholic!”
That’s what I feel like telling so many narrow-minded and/or dumb Traditionalists. I’m not a Traditionalist (as they, in practice, define such). I’m a Catholic! I have similar feelings when confronting non-Traditionalist Newchurch “Catholics” who claim they follow the pope and I don’t. Well, I follow everything “plenarily pope-ing popes” have clarified as being in Apostolic Tradition. Why? I believe in the Apostolic Catholic Church. I reject and denounce the malfeasant or “dysfunctional papal or episcopal Newchurch.”
Focusing on Ridiculous Trads
Recently, MAETA sent a press release concerning my bishop’s “refusing to let me say a Canonized Latin Mass for my 40th Ordination Anniversary over the tomb of my great-uncle Fr. Clemens Umbach, C.S.S.R. After all, I was ordained in 1966 to say the same Mass he was ordained to say (and was allowed to say by his properly functioning superiors). Then we were attacked by a petty-minded priest , who wrote to inform us Father Trinchard is wrong. He didn’t need his bishop’s permission to say “a Latin Mass.”
I know more than he does — that I don’t need permission to say “the Latin Mass.” However, the bishop controls the use of his churches (most of those big buildings with crosses on top of them). Or, have you heard?
However, to correct this priest’s remarks even further, I suggest he distinguish, lest he make a worse faux pas. By contemporary or “posited” church law, one could contend that a priest would need the bishop’s (or establishment Rome’s) permission to say the 1962 illegal (according to Quo Primum) perversion of the Canonized Latin Mass Liturgy. I don’t use the “1962 Liturgy” (as one well-respected group of trad priests does.) Again, dear priest, distinguish, or become a greater part of the fiducial problem. (If you’re humble enough to admit to me that you were wrong — even though such an admission might bring on “a heart attack”).
The distinguishing virtue of “Traditionalists” is that they have religious convictions, express these convictions and strive to live them. The distinguishing vice of “Traditionalists” is that they have religious convictions, express these convictions and strive to live them.
Thereby, the crucial salutary problem for Traditionalists is to make sure as best they can by study and prayer that they stand for what is truly right and just (in God’s “eyes”). Most of today’s Traditionalists remind me of the kids with whom I played football when I was young. Two became sports writers. One became a lawyer. We played football half the time. The other half of the time, they argued with each other. One of the classical debates addressed the question: “Was John’s catch pure luck or heads up playing?” Trads are worse. Today, they argue and debate about “the most ridiculous.” Usually, they fail to see what is the essential problem of our day. As it were, they debate about which outfit (that they individually imagine the emperor wearing) clothes the naked emperor the best — while the emperor remains “buck naked.”
The essential problem is the “buck naked” ecclesial establishment. Issues concerning episcopally-promoted sex ed and paedophilia are “child’s play” compared to the essential problem they have created and impose upon God’s people.
Issues concerning sede-vacantism, baptism of desire and other current non-essential concerns serve to distract Traditionalist news publications (e.g. The Wanderer’s one-time obsession with altar girls). Thereby, the essential problem, very few trads are willing to see, admit and properly react to the essential problem: the apocalyptic horror (Apos 13) is in our midst. What makes the bishop “buck naked” is his imposing a fake sacrilegious service in place of the Canonized Latin Mass Liturgy.
Paul Tillich pointed out that the Catholic and Apostolic clergy have one essential role — the priestly role. In the one and only Catholic, Apostolic, orthodox church, this role is to know, appreciate, properly apply and hand on completely intact the Sacred Living Heart of Jesus — the Canonized Apostolic Mass Liturgy or Divine Liturgy.
Today’s clergy, from pope to priest, obviously have failed to do this. (Read Abbot & Me On Liturgy, New Mass Conclusively Invalid, Sacraments Sacrileged and other MAETA publications). Trads unite! Perceive, agree, be convinced about, “fight against” and never forget the episcopal “New Mass” which is invalid.
This is the heart of the issue — man’s liturgy has supplanted God’s liturgy. As Paul VI correctly observed concerning “New Mass,” “We are giving up something of priceless worth” [the true Mass]. Be concerned. Be obsessed with this essential problem: “666” has replaced God-given Divine Liturgy. On “un-defined” issues, let others have freedom. In all things, cultivate and express charity, which is the “agape-love” of God first, foremost in all we think, decide, do and refuse to do.
“All of what is Thine all, we give to Thee, in all, and for the sake of all.” (Eastern Divine Liturgy).