Tradition: A Different Worldview

By Patrick Pierce, Traditius

And be not conformed to this world: but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may prove what is the good and the acceptable and the perfect will of God.”

– St. Paul, The Epistle to the Romans, 12:2 (DR)

“For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul?”

– Jesus Christ, The Gospel of Saint Matthew 16:26-27 (DR)

The modern point of view seems to be that there is the Now, the things being done and discussed around us, and there is the Unimportant—history, tradition, and anything else generally found outside the scope of our immediate ambitions.  This view is bolstered by the undeniable fact that by the time we’ve worked through our day and returned home we have maybe two hours to do whatever it is that relaxes us, and that combined with whatever we need to do to prepare for the next workday.  Turning our attention to history, tradition, and away from the topics of the public square–entertainment, sports, gossip–is simply a luxury most would rightly claim they don’t have time for.

What this viewpoint misses, though, is that history informs every moment of the now, tradition suggests views of life that can help you wisely through the day.  More than that, the ideas we discuss have a genealogy we might not even know, our presumptions about life are for the most part borrowed or suggested from the outside world more often than from our faith or family.  Our way of looking at things is largely dictated by our education, by the media and by the contemporary culture if we don’t make the time to become better grounded.

Every age, in a way, has a worldview, and the worldview of our age is identifiable.  Some might label it postmodern, or modernity or even, as we will do here, modernism.  But whatever the label, it is all around us, it can be witnessed and, if you know enough about it, actually stepped back from to take an objective look at it.  And, at that pivotal point, you are free to do something quite remarkable—you can reject it.

The modern worldview, whether you realize it yet or not, is basically that everything should be separate.  That is, it takes things apart and “atomizes” them, sealing everyone into their own little bubble world.  In this age there is, few are to believe, no objective truth.  There is only your truth, the things you alone in your experience have decided to be true based on your thoughts and experiences.  Entertainment, media, academia all suggest it, spin it, enforce it:  Your truth is to be kept separate, that is, it should not interfere with anyone else’s version of the truth, and you certainly shouldn’t go around declaring that there is one truth that applies to everyone.  It is very important that your truth become separate, because the modern age seeks to keep the peace by making certain there is no judgment–that is, that you do not impose your truth on the next person, since they are also entitled to live in their own bubble world.  To force them to consider truths beyond it is a dangerous business because it can tempt you to commit the cardinal sin of the modern age: judgment.  By asserting that your truth is more correct, you are telling someone else that theirs is less so, and this can make them feel bad.

If you are able to see it clearly you’ll see that we’ve constructed a whole society on this idea.  Saying what you believe, if indeed you dare to really believe anything at all because believe nothing is quite cool as well, can harm you at school, at your job and sometimes even in your home.  So, to keep the peace, the pursuit of truth has become subjective in our time, something you consider in your own little atom of a universe, your own private truth bubble where you can believe things as a personal hobby, like stamp collecting, as long as you don’t try to press the matter and start blathering on about what is universally true.

On a grand scale this attitude towards the world feeds into many other modern philosophies, for example, multiculturalism and its core idea that no culture has better truths than any other, that they are all just different and equal, or moral relativism, that no set of moral beliefs is any better than another.  The key to the modernist view, the “liberal” view, is that everything should be kept quite separate, and to accomplish that we all need to reduce our beliefs to a pastime, or to keep them to ourselves no matter the cost.

This was not always the case, and even modernists will eagerly tell you so.  They will tell you that in ages past people killed each other because they had different religious beliefs they thought were true, and that this even caused wars.  The worst actor in this drama they speak of is often the Roman Catholic Church, which tried to assert its truth everywhere, causing division and violence until the glorious Enlightenment which led to modern governments that were themselves atomized in that they weren’t to deal at all with religion or faith either.  Government should be separate from all of this, in more ways than one.  (A reasonable study of history will of course show that communist atheists killed far more than noble rulers of the past, and that the corrupt rulers of the past cause violence on neighbors because of their own ambitions, politics or inclination toward evil.  But that kind of thinking just doesn’t fit the current age.  It’s too judgmental.)

This separateness of modernity in each aspect of life, where everything is a choice and judgment is bad form, has created a slippery slope.  If nothing is true then nothing is right or wrong.  If judging is the ultimate sin, then one man’s virtue is another man’s vice and we all slowly slide down the slope toward doing precisely what we want, whether it has implications for the culture or not, whether it degrades society or not.  Slowly, then, you get what we see in the culture today: perversion, vice, freakishness on every channel and front page.  And regardless of your own personal belief system, you likely deep down know this truth: without being held to virtue, people will lean toward vice, what feels good, what’s easy, and they will create a world in their head where everything they want to do is justified.  This little trick is much easier to accomplish, of course, if there is no objective truth around to judge your actions against.

We all long to be a part of something, we all long to know our part in the whole, and the fact is that these human longings are a part of our very soul, and that beginning to address them is simply a matter of looking at things differently.  Jesus and his apostles called us to step out of our age, to follow Him.  He not only claimed that there was truth, he claimed to be that truth.

You do not have to take my word for any of this.  But as you watch television, or listen to the media, look for these presumptions that try to separate you from others, from a world that we are all in together, that we must keep out of the sewers together.  Imagine that we all are in this together, aimed at the truth that is our salvation and ponder it at the back of your mind.  Gather evidence for or against the idea that we all might be better off in a world where everyone’s bubble is popped and we are out in the open once again, left to wrestle with ideas and truths again, a society aimed at creating a world aware of the great good of salvation, which can even be discussed without shame in public, at work, or even in our homes.

It is my hope that this column provides you with a simple pin, and that you will one day, after some reflection and consideration, reach out with it, pop your bubble, and let the truth rush in.  As uncomfortable as the idea might be at first, as all of your personal justifications and ego defenses float out and away, you will I think discover, perhaps for the first time, that you are not so separate after all.

The Tridentine Fallacy

trent.png
What most people call the “Latin Mass” seems to have a bewildering number of names and many of them are imprecise for one reason or another. Perhaps surprisingly ”Latin Mass” is the least precise of all. But another label, Tridentine, can be used by some naysayers in a way that is downright troublesome.

Among the many names for it, calling the liturgy conducted in Latin and pursuant to the 1962 Missal the “Extraordinary Form” is certainly accurate since Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum formalized the term, along with the term Ordinary Form for the form of the Mass commonly seen today. Pope Francis seems to prefer calling the Extraordinary Form the Vetus Ordo, or Old Form, which lines up nicely given that the Ordinary Form is also called the Novus Ordo, or New Form. So, regardless of any possible connotations, the benefit of the labels Extraordinary Form or Vetus Ordo for the so-called Latin Mass is that they are precise, accurate and used by popes. Many, though, prefer to call the Traditional Latin Mass/Old Form/Extraordinary Form the “Tridentine Mass,” which, historically speaking, can be both right and wrong, and which is often a springboard to an increasingly common and often deliberate fallacy.

Continue reading “The Tridentine Fallacy”

The Tridentine Fallacy

trent.png
What most people call the “Latin Mass” seems to have a bewildering number of names and many of them are imprecise for one reason or another. Perhaps surprisingly ”Latin Mass” is the least precise of all. But another label, Tridentine, can be used by some naysayers in a way that is downright troublesome.

Among the many names for it, calling the liturgy conducted in Latin and pursuant to the 1962 Missal the “Extraordinary Form” is certainly accurate since Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum formalized the term, along with the term Ordinary Form for the form of the Mass commonly seen today. Pope Francis seems to prefer calling the Extraordinary Form the Vetus Ordo, or Old Form, which lines up nicely given that the Ordinary Form is also called the Novus Ordo, or New Form. So, regardless of any possible connotations, the benefit of the labels Extraordinary Form or Vetus Ordo for the so-called Latin Mass is that they are precise, accurate and used by popes. Many, though, prefer to call the Traditional Latin Mass/Old Form/Extraordinary Form the “Tridentine Mass,” which, historically speaking, can be both right and wrong, and which is often a springboard to an increasingly common and often deliberate fallacy.

Continue reading “The Tridentine Fallacy”

Twas The Night Of Nicea

Twas the Night Of Nicea, and all through the land,
The bishops were gathering, with hopes for a plan.
Three cent’ries before, Jesus had been,
But many still differed on just what that means.

Go and decide, the Emperor had said,
And so they all went, pressing firmly ahead.
Easter’s date to consider, a creed to declare,
Much to decide, with faith and with prayer.

But storm clouds were brewing. A heresy had spread:
Jesus was prophet–a branch, not the head.
Arius led them. And for this he had fought,
But it was not the good news that the apostles had taught.
Continue reading “Twas The Night Of Nicea”

What The Question Isn’t: Can A Catholic Be A Libertarian?

Unknown artists. Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, June 1885.Can someone be an unapologetic member of the Catholic Church and a proud member of the Libertarian Party at the same time? One is a faith with a strong moral code and high expectations for individuals and societies, the other is a political party which is for liberty across the board and for government only big enough to protect us from aggression and fraud.

There are, after all, many who say these two philosophies are contradictory, that it is impossible to be both, that to do so borders on scandal. See, for example, the Washington Post column Can you be Catholic and Libertarian?, as well as the National Catholic Report piece on Catholicism and Libertarianism Clash Over Property and the Common Good and Catholics Divided on Libertarianism as ‘Heresy’ on the Blaze site.

Moreover there are occasional, impassioned discussions at the Catholic Answers Forums and occasional blog posts both ways around the web such as Can Catholicism and Libertarianism Co-Exist? and Catholic and Libertarian? Cardinal Says They’re Incompatible. This is Why He’s Wrong. The problem with many of these, though, is that they are answering a flawed question. The real question is not can you be a Catholic and a Libertarian, the real question is how can a Catholic be anything else?

Continue reading “What The Question Isn’t: Can A Catholic Be A Libertarian?”

Unraveling Saint Buddha

Cross of St. Thomas the Apostle.
Cross of St. Thomas the Apostle

History and tradition are filled with twists and turns, highs and lows, glories and embarrassments.   Sometimes, though, sorting through it all is the path to truth.

When the apostles were sent into the world to convert it, many went beyond the boundaries of the Roman Empire. See generally, The Founding of Christendom, by Carroll. One of these was St. Thomas, who famously had to touch Jesus’ wounds to declare him “My Lord My God” thus fully realizing who He was. See John 20:28.

Thomas went to India. See here. While he was not successful in converting India to Christianity, there is evidence that he went, and evidence of ancient Christian areas in India. He is said to have come to Taxila in Western Punjab (currently in Pakistan) and evangelized. His efforts to convert the region may have been largely wiped out in later years by Kushan attacks, perhaps around 120 A.D.. See Carroll.

Still, stories persist through history of Christianity in India, a Christianity spread by Thomas, in the centuries after Christ. Indeed, there have even been stories of saints.

Continue reading “Unraveling Saint Buddha”