Latin Mass V. Demonic-Charismatic Catholicism as a Theological Contradiction
By Joseph Andrew Settanni
It is rationally contended that one can fairly assert the superiority of Extraordinary Form of the Mass regarding the questioned quality of Charismatic emotionalism; this is as to an examination of the matter as to whether or not the Charismatic Movement is a true heresy needing to be properly condemned, especially as compared, in contrast, to the theologically orthodox qualities of the Latin Mass.
Catholicism is supposed to be always appropriately distinguished (from, e. g., Protestantism) by its open appeal, a united one, to both faith and reason with no existential, experiential, or any other conflict whatsoever between the two, which is related to orthodoxy; both, faith and reason, do add to each other, moreover, by substantively and substantially solidifying the requisite devotion to truth because all truth is ultimately of a final unity, namely, God.
Because nominalism in cognition is rejected, there is, moreover, no epistemologically valid two-truths theory nor does religion and science ever conflict, when each is properly understood as such. Equally, if there was no claim to the possession of true orthodoxy, then Catholicism, the Faith, would be a total fraud.
The Extraordinary Form of the Mass, which has been around for over 1500 years that has, of course, included the Tridentine Mass of the Council of Trent, has been logically and forcefully hated by heretics; the old Mass has been, in fact, one of the major and tremendous bulwarks against the evil of heresy; it is not surprising, one can interestingly note, that the vast majority of charismatics do studiously avoid it whenever possible, as it is and will always be the epitome of orthodox theological practice and prayer, religious exercise and spiritual devotion.
A generalized Christianity is, thus, not Catholicism; and, on the other hand, any heightened states of emotionalism and excessive psychological excitation are not to be made simplistically equivalent to the extremely different and genuine spiritual exaltations, e. g., of St. John of the Cross or St. Theresa of Avila; good analytical reading, to better help keenly qualify what is exactly meant concerning radical excessiveness posing as true belief, would certainly include Msgr. Ronald Knox’s Enthusiasm.
Absurdities, Paradoxes, and Idiocies
What is yet asserted in opposition? The Charismatic Movement epistemologically insists, however, that all Christians, meaning thus regardless of denomination, can still be always good Christians together, meaning that there is, in fact, no necessary need for any required conversion from heresy to orthodoxy; thus, all charismatics are held to just be equally on exactly the same theological plane or level as to a proper acknowledgement of ontological truth, as to, finally, the Being (of the beingness) of Christ; this is then, however, a manifestly heretical view and, by definition, the entire Charismatic Movement (CM) is, therefore, clearly a heresy. Only the theologically ignorant would dispute this rather obvious fact of how such absurdity pretends to be the top most reality of profundity.
All heresies, as they, by definition, do endanger millions of souls sooner or later, must certainly be so rightly condemned as such without exception. Besides seeing latitudinarianism, there is the aggressive relativism of a generalized Christianity existing, eventually, without (any) dogmas, doctrines, traditions, or, in fact, anything once thought necessary for a religion of substance, not any mere symbolism. While charismatics may claim a democratic attitude toward belief, they, if such believers are to be believed as believable, constitute an odd kind of spiritual elite who are in tune with the higher cosmic forces of the universe. In short, various and endless absurdities, paradoxes, and idiocies are unavoidable, as one tries to do a substantial and substantive analysis of this religious phenomenon qua movement.
A charismatic Catholicism is, consequently, an absolute theological contradiction in that the supremacy, ultimately, of a charismatically inspired faith overshadows and overawes any possible appeal to rational theological discourse not fully in tune with the ever integral emotionalism, the truly excessive psycho-exaltation, of the CM’s appeal. Prior to the mid to late 20th century, it would have been recognized as being a kind of illegitimate theological parallelism of Protestant Evangelicalism, meaning as to the both axiomatically determined and dramatic heightening of passions and emotions, as supposedly directed toward Christianity.
Catholics, in short, weren’t ever supposed to act like or believe as (any radical fringe group) Protestants; it was something known, axiomatically, to be both necessarily and obviously against the very notion of Catholicism itself, meaning the theological construct as such that defined its integral religious legitimacy and permanent apostolic authority; in brief, Catholicism was supposed to be always totally different from Protestantism, meaning as to all substantive theological legitimacy whatsoever; otherwise, no one should bother, logically speaking, to be a Catholic versus a Protestant.
If ever really examined objectively, however, what goes on, in basic terms of excessively excited human passions, dates back, at the least, to the ancient Dionysian cults in the Western world; as a matter of fact, the CM from the Catholic point of view of theological orthodoxy is actually only a cult as is, e. g., Mormonism or the Jehovah Witnesses. The last two named have even be identified, moreover, as non-Christian cults beyond the range of the ordinary theological radicalism that defines Protestantism itself, which is cognitively recognized by the inherently definitive fact of the constant splintering or obvious continuous sectarianism of it; Protestantism is, by definition, sectarianism qua radicalism glorified as a supposed, though false, normality of acceptable or, perhaps, conventional Christian religion.
But, this not of the same nature or kind as one speaks of the Cult of the Blessed Virgin Mary; the CM cult, which is a curiosity, does not really need Catholicism and, as an exotic growth, can prosper within general Christian denominations; this is essentially since charismatics recognize each other’s related feelings, sentiments, and sensitivities that are, thus, being held as theologically equal or, at a minimum, basically equivalent because all of them, seemingly without exception, can worship together as equals, as equipollent Christians.
Being charismatic is, thus, made the universalizing experience and absolute validation of the simply inherent worthiness (purportedly) of the believer with, at least, an implied indifference and, sometimes, an explicit apathy toward any particular understanding and comprehension of Christianity as to true orthodox belief.
As was instructively stated earlier, it is nearly impossible, therefore, to find devotees of the Latin Mass, the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, among the vast majority of CM people and vice versa; the two positions are forever essentially and definitionally incompatible and incommensurate to an extreme degree; the two points of view represented cannot really coexist, either existential or experientially, in specific and known theological terms of reference. On the other hand, in marked contrast, enormous numbers of New Mass, Novus Ordo, believers see no difficulty whatsoever in being simultaneously a New Mass or Ordinary Form of the Mass attendee and, more or less, a devoted CM cult member.
But, among all non-Catholic charismatics, these same people are always very selective scripturalists who demand total literalism for either speaking in tongues or, for others, taking up snakes because the Holy Scriptures say so; yet, they all deny explicitly, being that they are Protestants, the transubstantiation of the Holy Eucharist as being the true body and blood, soul and divinity, of the Lord Jesus Christ, which, thus, contradicts completely their supposed great devotion to strict Biblical literalism, except when it serves their own convenient purposes, of course. One can so readily understand, therefore, that the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura, not ever unexpectedly, has and will always present a slippery slope kind of self-serving argumentation, which is another true sign of both intrinsic and axiomatic heresy.
And yet, one cannot, logically and theologically, be both a true charismatic and a true Catholic at one and the same time, if one properly defines orthodox belief as being obviously consistent with inherent support for all the dogmas, doctrines, and traditions of the Faith. Because there are so many explicit parallels with Evangelical Protestantism as to “movements of the spirit” within the impassioned souls of inflamed believers who are fired up for Jesus, who are ardently, enthusiastic spirit-filled Christians, etc., this ought to naturally alert serious and concerned Catholics as to the heretical realities and heterodox, unorthodox, matters that significantly, not just coincidentally, revolve around the essence of the CM cult. What is a logical consequence as to what is meant?
Catholicism, with its ever known claims to an absolute universality, as to its then always theologically undivided wholeness becomes, in context, a merely secondary or tertiary concern, for any sufficiently dedicated, committed, and believing charismatics; they naturally see the CM as creating an ever larger religious community of their own creation with its own universality in terms of being catholic, meaning universal, in their minds; this is presented, of course, in its supposed progressive theological appeal to both various denominational and nondenominational Christians throughout the entire world.
This attitude fits in perfectly with modernist ecumenism, coming from the fiasco of Vatican II, in that no one needs to convert to Catholicism because all Christians qua charismatics spiritually constitute the truly global or worldwide (read: catholic with a small “c”) community of believers. What is also going on, nonetheless, can be related to neo-Pelagianism in that Christians, regardless of denomination, see themselves as transformed metaphysically as charismatics, which is why one ought to know that, e. g., Pentecostalism is really a modernized form of the heresy of neo-Montanism. However, one can still comment that all of this pseudo-religiousness is plainly gratuitous experiential narcissism, parading as a genuine sense of intensified spiritual devotion, so claiming to yield states of (solipsistic?) exaltation.
One may wish that the reader could have read Orestes Augustus Brownson’s interesting volume simply entitled The Convert, which was his 1844 apologia of his conversion to Catholicism; Brownson, one of the most unusual and intriguing characters of the 19th century and of any era, had explored a plethora of religious movements, besides political, social, and other causes, to the most radical degree. But, due to the continuing tradition of anti-Catholic bigotry in America, almost all (non-Catholic) historians have just treated him as a nonperson after his conversion; he, a certainly countercultural figure due to the hostile era of his choice of Catholicism, just drops out of the history books by 1845, though he lived long into the 19th century, with his extensive writing, thinking, and level of advocacy.
Brownson would, therefore, have seen through the coy conceit and fancy fog of profundity to get at the raw core of the imprudent imposture of such highly questionable religiosity. A mind as surely great as his would then, therefore, have easily discerned the vast multiplicity of theological errors so necessarily involved with the CM that, one fairly suspects, had Christian-oriented referents qua heresies during his own time, including neo-Montanism, of course.
Substance of Religious Controversy Discussed
And, further theological research will surely reveal that an increasing host of other cognate heresies can be intelligently brought to the attention of the reader, meaning explicitly as to why the CM cult needs to be properly recognized for what it really and unequivocally is, a cheap ersatz effort at quasi-holiness. It then undermines the institutional nature of the Roman Catholic Church. Because its focus, by definition, is never set toward the core values of religious orthodoxy, it is certain that demonic forces love to get involved when people put ever heightened emotionalism, unguarded by a directive faith, above reason, above basic rationality (and common sense) for the human mind.
A highly critical point must be made that if what is being discussed is supposed to be in the true realm of the charismatic, then it is not, by definition, at all consistent with Catholicism; if it is really charismatic, then it is not Catholic. And, that is the essential bottom line, theologically speaking, as to what actual religion, not fanaticism or superstition, is to be all about, meaning concerning genuine belief systems that are to be, in fact, held forth as truly religious in nature. Fortunately, enthusiasm for the CM has been decreasing these past years, as fairly compared to, say, ten to fifteen years ago, when it was then so seemingly fashionable and seriously seen, unfortunately, as a true means of Catholic renewal.
It is not by theological accident or mere religious chance that the destructiveness to orthodoxy to be expected from the released of aberrant passions, through this form of enthusiasm, was, back in the 1970s, given a truly major endorsement by Leon Joseph Cardinal Suenens; he, an opponent of Catholic traditionalism and Humanae Vitae, was then a leading cardinal in the Church and, more to the point, one of four official moderators of the Second Vatican Council. Need more really be said as to the radicalism and heterodoxy involved, meaning surely when clearly fringe group Protestant practices get themselves disgustingly admitted into Holy Mother Church?
It is publicly known that charismatic advocates have appeared on EWTN, a cable television network that is supposed to be existing as the premier "conservative" Catholic e-media, which says much about the perils of publicity, if nothing else. Added to the mix, the most notable institution extravagantly favoring and publicly upholding this vile heresy is the Franciscan University of Stuebenville, Ohio; this academic compound is popularly thought of, regrettably, as a "conservative" school—where the clear majority of students have actively participated in these shocking demonic occurrences. Of course, modernist ecumenism is, admittedly, the larger problem and culprit definitely behind all of this mess.
Miscellaneous corybantic gyrations and twisting quasi-acrobatic perambulations that pervert the human senses and deform mental processes do not, in truth, glorify the Lord God but do usually prepare people for demonic penetration of their souls. Readers can consult such excellent volumes as Exorcism and the Church Militant by Fr. Thomas Euteneuer, President of Human Life International and an exorcist, or Fr. Gabriele Amorth’s An Exorcist Tells His Story and his An Exorcist: More Stories.
To the associated point of this present article condemning the CM, Stuebenville’s fairly famous Prof. Scott Hahn, himself a heretical convert to Catholicism, has frequently spoken in adamant favor of this disgusting madness. Yes, there is another name for any assumed “speaking in tongues” (AKA gibberish) but such discussion, in the vernacular, is not meant for polite society. One can here also, unfortunately, recall correctly that Pope John Paul II had held improper audiences for various groups and leaders of this spiritually and religiously terrible movement, besides, of course, questionably conducting some cognate correspondence with them.
Among other interesting volumes that could be here properly cited, Christopher A. Ferrara’s book titled EWTN: A Network Gone Wrong documents the notable heretical teachings of Hahn and the dabbling in manifestly heterodox notions and groups of Pope John Paul II [wrongly said to be “the Great”] who could not always easily distinguish between what was or was not a heresy. This is not, of course, to improperly disparage papal infallibility that only pertains exclusively to the matters of faith and morals, not the personal opinions or doings of any pope.
The Holy Spirit, according to Catholic teachings, always protects a pope from, thus, committing an act of heresy against the Faith, morals, or the Church, not acts of stupidity. It is, of course, a firm theological doctrine held dogmatically, not the equivalent of a therapeutic psychiatric provision for cognitive health.
The Roman Catholic Faith has, therefore, survived the machinations and misdeeds, moral improprieties and religious irregularities, of many popes, by the aforementioned power of the Holy Spirit; in addition, the universal teachings of the Church, the dogmas, doctrines, and traditions, have also helped to so maintain fundamental and requisite theological stability versus the absurd search for endless novelties or fascinations. Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium remain the three main pillars of the Faith, which includes unwavering support for the Trinitarian Dogma. So, what is the substance of the nature of this religious controversy?
Catholicism is, by inherent definition, of the very essence of absolute catholicity, meaning universality, such that the CM can only, in direct contrast, be an aberrant and intensively juvenile desire to oddly and perversely, emotionally and psychologically, experience excessive heaps of signs and wonders, through an assumed holy glossolalia that only pertained, correctly, to the Apostolic Age. It is no doubt that, as a confirmed enemy of orthodoxy, Cardinal Suenens had so well appreciated how self-indulgent the CM people are with their acts of ego-gratification hysterics, which adheres to the alleged Spirit of Vatican II. Some might doubt, however, that the Christian martyrs brutally killed in the ancient Roman circuses or, perhaps, today’s massacred believers, in various countries, willingly gave up their lives so that such ego-satisfaction exercises might joyously prevail.
Atavistic attempts at supposedly recreating such crudely assumed primitivism of the early Church are part and parcel of the ever intrinsic radicalism of Protestantism, fringe groups or otherwise. Concern ought to be for doxology, Christology, soteriology, eschatology, and other related matters of theological substance much greater than mere sensational or dramatic physical exercises said to be religious in nature.
There ought to be no valid or true religious need for constantly seeking out endless signs and wonders or whatever might be, in any way whatsoever, their equivalent; Jesus explicitly said that blessed are they who believe but have not seen. Can He have been more clear than that expression of the religious finality of Christian faith? Devout Catholics, among all sincere Christians, do not need an overwhelming outpouring of endless kinds and types of incredible signs and fantastic wonders, as with, as is known, the typical devotees, the often disparate followers, of the CM.
As with the dogmatic, doctrinal, and divine centeredness of favoring the orthodoxy of the Latin Mass, there is no wasted need to do any idiotic divining between a supposedly false versus true ecumenism, as with the analogous absurdity of a true versus false superstition, because modernist ecumenism in and of itself is heretical; Christ Himself, the head of the Church, did not say anything ever equivalent to, e. g., “go out and be ecumenical”; He specifically said, in no uncertain terms, to boldly go forth and baptize in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost; a good basic theological test would be properly called the Athanasian Test. How is this critically meant?
If St. Athanasius would, logically speaking, condemn ecumenism, then it is something he would have surely thought was, by definition, heretical. For centuries after his death, Athanasianism, moreover, was held forth as a synonym for Catholicism, and one ought not need to guess why. Q. E. D.
What can also be critically considered is if there have been hundreds or thousands of religious vocations and, perhaps, innumerable young men enthusiastically wanting to enter into Holy Orders; this has not, in fact, happened; the fruits are extremely indicative of that which is good or bad; the CM has not yet, after 50 years, produced such good fruits and that has been, therefore, most empirically indicative of the fundamental truth being openly discussed; equally, once the emotional high of a CM conversion has completely passed, how long does such a convert completely remain within the Church or, rather, becomes an apostate, by whatever name.
In greatly vivid contrast, the Latin Mass community has produced many religious vocations and typically the families of such orthodox people are rather large, which means, in addition, an increasing number of actual present and, thus, future Catholics. The same, interestingly enough, cannot even be said of the Novus Ordo community. Charismaticism has been, theologically and religiously speaking, a surely clear disappointment to the nth degree; it has not tremendously fostered, in fact, any movement toward an enduring and extensive holiness by which the Church has then seen a direct transformation as a result.
Question: Where are the many dozens upon dozens of charismatic-inspired seminaries, monasteries, and convents? Answer: They are nonexistent. Both the question and the answer are not insignificant, as some might wishfully believe. One can note, furthermore, that the necessary vulgarization of what ought to be a (supposed) religious sensibility needs then to be so appropriately remarked upon here and without any hesitation. Where are the observed, growing millions upon millions of CM converts, if this God-inspiring spirituality is true, eagerly rushing into the Church? They don’t now exist and, in truth, never will. No surprise.
Charismaticism in obvious terms of its supposedly being an authentic Catholic form of spirituality is—guess what?—equally nonexistent. Name the number of CM saints recognized by the Church. There aren’t any. A fairly contemporary man, e. g., St. Padre Pio had been, interestingly, a celebrant of the Latin Mass. The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter must literally send away hundreds of young men, each and every year, desiring to be Latin Mass priests because there are simply not enough rooms available to house them all at the American seminary; the same, however, is not true at all for the relatively small number of Novus Ordo-oriented candidates at any such seminaries. More to the central point, of course, there are no CM seminaries sending away hundreds of candidates for the priesthood due to a lack of room (or for any other reason).
Charismaticism, in short, is just a vulgar joke and deformed means of pseudo-worship, not a supposed success story. The theologically proper stress of genuine orthodoxy is, in truly manifest and permanent contradistinction, set quite logically upon holiness, not CM’s gratuitous experiential narcissism disguised erratically as a higher spiritual attitude prevalent among such deluded believers.
Conclusion
The only realistic and reliable antidote for the ecumenical poison of Charismaticism is, as one might guess by now, the traditional Latin Mass; this is chiefly because of its defiant and consistent religious orthodoxy versus the heresy of constantly seeking emotional sensations and odd excitations, emotive vibrations and weird perambulations, of a decidedly bizarre nature not properly consonant with the orthodox and traditional models of devotion habitually sanctioned by Holy Mother Church.
It is, therefore, no mere religious coincidence that Pope Benedict XVI has been and remains a very strong supporter of the Latin Mass, which is now referred to as the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. This will become an importantly renewed path toward a return to needed normalcy after the fanatical phenomenological and existential efforts at pseudo-reform have all, finally, been recognized as true failures in their lack of a needed regard and respect for orthodoxy, for an Athanasian Catholicism.
Athanasius contra mindum!
Bibliography
Heather M. Erb. “The Charismatic Appetite,” New Oxford Review, November 2008.
Christopher A. Ferrara. EWTN: A Network Gone Wrong. How the Eternal Word Television Network is contributing to the spread of “silent apostasy” in the Roman Catholic Church. 2006.
Msgr. Ronald Knox. Enthusiasm.
Lee Penn. “Beware! The New Age Movement Is More Than Self-Indulgent Silliness,” New Oxford Review, July-August 2000.
John Vennari. “ ‘Catholic’ Charismatic Extravaganza,” Catholic Family News, August 1997.
John Vennari. Close-ups of the Charismatic Movement. 2002.
Reference
http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20020510_BR_Charismatic.html
No comments:
Post a Comment