Recommended
Father Anthony Chadwick, a priest whose traditional, expansive, evangelical, non-polemic and orthodox outlooks on the Church and her liturgy are a pleasure to read gets it right about monasticism and traditionalist movements. There's hardly a hint of any romanticizing of the old or even those who promote the old, but there is a profound appreciation and respect for the old rite, a respect that doesn't exclude the free Spirit of the Gospel and its manifestations.
I have recently received several e-mails criticising my enthusiatic welcome of Pope Benedict XVI. The question is whether I am right in seeking to see the Tradition in a vision such as that of the "orthodox modernist" school (to qualify this term, theologians working according to methods similar to those of the Modernists but without being heretical). The essential point in this vision is that the Church has no apologetic defence other than holiness and beauty. Casel, Bouyer and Ratzinger, among many others sought what underpinned Vatican II. Casel died in 1948, but Bouyer, Ratzinger and others "stopped" in about 1968 when they saw that the noble aspirations of the theological and liturgical movements were being shattered by the 1968 "pop revolution" - nihilism and ararchy set in, producing what has scandalized Catholics ever since. John Paul II's theology was essentially existentialist (that's why nobody could read his encyclicals), and could do nothing against modern nihilism. On the other hand, the earlier theological movement were bringing in elements of Platonism and neo-patristics - what have gone into a recent English theological movement called "Radical Orthodoxy". I have an understanding of the way these men think, having known old country priests who in 1962 welcomed Vatican II but who said the traditional Mass to the end of their lives, having been to Fribourg University where most of my friends were Germans. Cardinal (then Father) Christoph von Schönborn was one of my professors, whose classes were meditations on God's love in the rigour of his intellect.
I suffered considerably with the backward-looking vision of the SSPX and even some of the indult communities like the Institute of Christ the King to which I once belonged - which was the least fundamentalist, most "baroque" and most cultured. As a former Anglican, influenced by Newman and Bouyer, I became interested in the Russian School (Lossky, Berdiaev, Bobrinskoy, etc.) and found Casel, Ratzinger, De Lubac and Urs von Balthasar thinking along practically the same lines. The concern was the same: the end of the Renaissance heritage and the transition of man into the Great Unknown. I have nothing of the intellectual stature of these men, but I am perfectly restless with the emasculated theology and spirituality of Ecône and those who would have us live in shadows and illusions.
Had the SSPX and parallel movements been able to create a unified movement without a totalitarian and sectarian spirit, being able to produce a sense of light instead of darkness and fear, then I would have followed it. The SSPX is in shreds, especially here in France. The sedevacantists continue their snivelling attitude, and I have come to the stage where I want to know no more about them. Novus Ordo Watch and Fr. Morrison's Traditio disappoint me - I will keep these people in my prayers.
Faith is a theologal virtue, a supernatural gift. Theology is fides quaerens intellectum in the words of St Anselm. I don't think Cardinal Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, would deny this. But, faith is not something static, marking the "saved" out from the "unsaved". The basis must remain the same: the Liturgy, the Scriptures, the Fathers, St Thomas Aquinas - but we have to admit that there was little real speculation about the Church until Möhler in the 19th century, bringing out the mystical dimension of the Church over the canonical and institutional aspects. We must beware of anti-intellectualism as much as excessive intellectualism - I recommend the reading of Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose: the abbey library, the Venerable Jorge, whose conservatism leads him to pure evil. This book is deliberately unhistorical - it is a parable. Cardinal Ratzinger, when he was in hospital in the early 1990's, read Dostoievsky's The Karamazov Brothers, containing the Legend of the Great Inquisitor. That little parable has always fascinated me. Yes, I am a traditionalist, but I read Urs von Balthasar, Henri de Lubac, Yves Congar, Louis Bouyer, Dom Odo Casel, Msgr Klaus Gamber - and Ratzinger. One never ceases to learn from these great men of faith and intellect.
About monasticism?
Pope Benedict XVI obviously has a great devotion to St Benedict and the Order of Benedictine monks and nuns. I do believe the renewal can come out of the contemplative life and the silent labours of the monks. The Abbey of Fontgombault in France and its daughter houses, many of which are abbeys in their own right, has a tremendous influence in France. Personally, I find the austere style of these abbeys a little "miltary" for my tastes: take the novice, break him and rebuild him, like in the Army. I do believe that the monastic life needs to become more human and more based on building the original personality rather than destroying it to produce a stereotype, or at least what appears to be such.
I would hope that the new Pope will encourage the founding of more monasteries - of diverse spiritualities and approaches to forming their novices and those who genuinely enter in order to find God. I strongly believe in the need for contemplative communities and the work monks have always done in the past: theological research and writing, publishing, using modern media like the Internet to spread the Gospel to those who hunger and thirst for the Absolute, art and culture, the possibilities are limitless. Above all, in a monastery, nothing is preferred to the Opus Dei - not the Spanish cult-like movement - but the Work of God, the liturgy of the Office and the Mass. Only the monastic vision is capable of bringing about a new liturgical movement and a real restoration.
Rather than bishops and priests of the traditionalist fraternities, I would see more monks and religious appointed to high offices in the Vatican and placed in charge of matters like the liturgy and the doctrine of the faith. The monastic vocation is a radical step, and monastic theology has done nothing to pander to the whims of "popular devotions" and emasculated spirituality. The Pope has asked of us an adult act of faith - we need to grow up in order to eat meat instead of continuing to drink milk. It is not by accident that all bishops of the Eastern Orthodox Church are monks. Perhaps the situation in the Catholic Church would be tremendously improved if more monks were appointed as bishops.
Perhaps it is time for us to blow the dust off our Rule of Saint Benedict! Most of us are not monks, but we would be surprised to find out how much of it can be applied in the lives of ordinary Catholics and secular clerics.
All found here in his April 2005 archive.
And if you haven't already, definitely read The New Liturgical Movement blog. For the last two months, it's been on the top of my blog reading.
Check out the post of a Commonweal article called, "The Catholic Bard: Shakespeare & the 'Old Religion'"
I found another quote of his that I had marked in one of my private entries. It reads:
The time has come for the Catholic Tradition to break out of its prison, so that the beauty of our ancient liturgy can continue in a living and truly Christian Church. If the progress of winning back the traditional Mass, Office and Sacraments has been hampered, it is largely due to the survival of the intransigent and totalitarian spirit, the very people who have used the Tridentine Mass as a war banner. Even the Indult communities have remained very "nineteenth century" in their outlook, and there are very few priests and people with an open spirit attached to the aspirations recognised as legitimate by John Paul II's Ecclesia Dei adflicta. We, in our turn, need to open up the doors and windows to let the fresh air in - but this time with discernment and wisdom in the light of our experience with the integralist-progressivist dialectics.
I have recently received several e-mails criticising my enthusiatic welcome of Pope Benedict XVI. The question is whether I am right in seeking to see the Tradition in a vision such as that of the "orthodox modernist" school (to qualify this term, theologians working according to methods similar to those of the Modernists but without being heretical). The essential point in this vision is that the Church has no apologetic defence other than holiness and beauty. Casel, Bouyer and Ratzinger, among many others sought what underpinned Vatican II. Casel died in 1948, but Bouyer, Ratzinger and others "stopped" in about 1968 when they saw that the noble aspirations of the theological and liturgical movements were being shattered by the 1968 "pop revolution" - nihilism and ararchy set in, producing what has scandalized Catholics ever since. John Paul II's theology was essentially existentialist (that's why nobody could read his encyclicals), and could do nothing against modern nihilism. On the other hand, the earlier theological movement were bringing in elements of Platonism and neo-patristics - what have gone into a recent English theological movement called "Radical Orthodoxy". I have an understanding of the way these men think, having known old country priests who in 1962 welcomed Vatican II but who said the traditional Mass to the end of their lives, having been to Fribourg University where most of my friends were Germans. Cardinal (then Father) Christoph von Schönborn was one of my professors, whose classes were meditations on God's love in the rigour of his intellect.
I suffered considerably with the backward-looking vision of the SSPX and even some of the indult communities like the Institute of Christ the King to which I once belonged - which was the least fundamentalist, most "baroque" and most cultured. As a former Anglican, influenced by Newman and Bouyer, I became interested in the Russian School (Lossky, Berdiaev, Bobrinskoy, etc.) and found Casel, Ratzinger, De Lubac and Urs von Balthasar thinking along practically the same lines. The concern was the same: the end of the Renaissance heritage and the transition of man into the Great Unknown. I have nothing of the intellectual stature of these men, but I am perfectly restless with the emasculated theology and spirituality of Ecône and those who would have us live in shadows and illusions.
Had the SSPX and parallel movements been able to create a unified movement without a totalitarian and sectarian spirit, being able to produce a sense of light instead of darkness and fear, then I would have followed it. The SSPX is in shreds, especially here in France. The sedevacantists continue their snivelling attitude, and I have come to the stage where I want to know no more about them. Novus Ordo Watch and Fr. Morrison's Traditio disappoint me - I will keep these people in my prayers.
Faith is a theologal virtue, a supernatural gift. Theology is fides quaerens intellectum in the words of St Anselm. I don't think Cardinal Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, would deny this. But, faith is not something static, marking the "saved" out from the "unsaved". The basis must remain the same: the Liturgy, the Scriptures, the Fathers, St Thomas Aquinas - but we have to admit that there was little real speculation about the Church until Möhler in the 19th century, bringing out the mystical dimension of the Church over the canonical and institutional aspects. We must beware of anti-intellectualism as much as excessive intellectualism - I recommend the reading of Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose: the abbey library, the Venerable Jorge, whose conservatism leads him to pure evil. This book is deliberately unhistorical - it is a parable. Cardinal Ratzinger, when he was in hospital in the early 1990's, read Dostoievsky's The Karamazov Brothers, containing the Legend of the Great Inquisitor. That little parable has always fascinated me. Yes, I am a traditionalist, but I read Urs von Balthasar, Henri de Lubac, Yves Congar, Louis Bouyer, Dom Odo Casel, Msgr Klaus Gamber - and Ratzinger. One never ceases to learn from these great men of faith and intellect.
About monasticism?
Pope Benedict XVI obviously has a great devotion to St Benedict and the Order of Benedictine monks and nuns. I do believe the renewal can come out of the contemplative life and the silent labours of the monks. The Abbey of Fontgombault in France and its daughter houses, many of which are abbeys in their own right, has a tremendous influence in France. Personally, I find the austere style of these abbeys a little "miltary" for my tastes: take the novice, break him and rebuild him, like in the Army. I do believe that the monastic life needs to become more human and more based on building the original personality rather than destroying it to produce a stereotype, or at least what appears to be such.
I would hope that the new Pope will encourage the founding of more monasteries - of diverse spiritualities and approaches to forming their novices and those who genuinely enter in order to find God. I strongly believe in the need for contemplative communities and the work monks have always done in the past: theological research and writing, publishing, using modern media like the Internet to spread the Gospel to those who hunger and thirst for the Absolute, art and culture, the possibilities are limitless. Above all, in a monastery, nothing is preferred to the Opus Dei - not the Spanish cult-like movement - but the Work of God, the liturgy of the Office and the Mass. Only the monastic vision is capable of bringing about a new liturgical movement and a real restoration.
Rather than bishops and priests of the traditionalist fraternities, I would see more monks and religious appointed to high offices in the Vatican and placed in charge of matters like the liturgy and the doctrine of the faith. The monastic vocation is a radical step, and monastic theology has done nothing to pander to the whims of "popular devotions" and emasculated spirituality. The Pope has asked of us an adult act of faith - we need to grow up in order to eat meat instead of continuing to drink milk. It is not by accident that all bishops of the Eastern Orthodox Church are monks. Perhaps the situation in the Catholic Church would be tremendously improved if more monks were appointed as bishops.
Perhaps it is time for us to blow the dust off our Rule of Saint Benedict! Most of us are not monks, but we would be surprised to find out how much of it can be applied in the lives of ordinary Catholics and secular clerics.
All found here in his April 2005 archive.
And if you haven't already, definitely read The New Liturgical Movement blog. For the last two months, it's been on the top of my blog reading.
Check out the post of a Commonweal article called, "The Catholic Bard: Shakespeare & the 'Old Religion'"
I found another quote of his that I had marked in one of my private entries. It reads:
The time has come for the Catholic Tradition to break out of its prison, so that the beauty of our ancient liturgy can continue in a living and truly Christian Church. If the progress of winning back the traditional Mass, Office and Sacraments has been hampered, it is largely due to the survival of the intransigent and totalitarian spirit, the very people who have used the Tridentine Mass as a war banner. Even the Indult communities have remained very "nineteenth century" in their outlook, and there are very few priests and people with an open spirit attached to the aspirations recognised as legitimate by John Paul II's Ecclesia Dei adflicta. We, in our turn, need to open up the doors and windows to let the fresh air in - but this time with discernment and wisdom in the light of our experience with the integralist-progressivist dialectics.