- What it means to be in communion with the Roman Pontiff? The criteria of infallibility - 15 December 2018
- The definition of the essence of man - 26 November 2018
- Reflection moral honesty of language: the Church has always had its own clear and precise language - 11 November 2018
FOR A HEALTHY traditionalism
The Lefebvrians confused with modernism, which is also present in Catholicism today, that healthy progressivism in doctrine and Christian life, which was promoted by the Council, that can make us talk about a healthy progressivism. A bad traditionalism stop the march of history, does not include the value of the new, mummification the perennial, confuses the unchanging with the inaction, the firmness with stiffness, the solid with petrified, the store with conservatism, loyalty with backwardness, progress with subversion and, to be steadfast in the past, is not capable of grasping the values and problems of the present and the hopes of the future.
She was the famous phrase of St. Pius X, who said, albeit in a private meeting and not in an official document, that a Catholic can not be a traditionalist. If we compare it with the attack on “Traditionalists” made by Pope Bergoglio in his speech at the recent Synod of Bishops on the family, it seems that a lot of water has passed under the bridge in the Papal Magisterium. And instead, apart from the legitimate or questionable personal preferences or opinions of the two Popes, we have to make some clarifications, after which, I hope, we realize that the distance to say the opposition is not as great as it might seem at first.
In fact ask ourselves what the two Popes have understood here to “love the tradition”. Which tradition? Tradition in that sense? “Love” how and how much? It should now be evident, for the Catholic Church educated and attentive to the facts of today, that the term “tradition” is understood in two different senses, so that, clarifying the respective meanings of the same term, we could be sure that the two Popes would cause data to each other. Indeed, while Pius X clearly referred to Sacred Tradition, which, together with Scripture, is a source of divine revelation guarded and infallibly interpreted by the Magisterium of the Church, Pope Francis has clearly condemned some “traditionalism”, that, bad interpreting Sacred Tradition or taking it as a pretext, denies the infallibility or the truth, or dares accuse error or possibility of error, the Magisterium of the Second Vatican Council and doctrinal, as a result, the Magisterium which it refers, of successive Popes, until the present reigning.
If we think of the Sacred Tradition, it is obvious that a Catholic can not be that traditionalist. Indeed, it can be said in a way that all the content of the doctrine of the faith is the subject of the apostolic tradition, according to the New Testament, intended to act as a time of transmitting or preach to voice, deliver [RM 6,17; The Cor 11,23; 15, 3; II Tm 2,2; Gd 3], and content of preaching, traditional [The Cor 11,2; Ii Ts 2,15; The Tm 6,20]. For Christ did not say to the apostles “write” the, as would a school teacher: “take notes”, but: “predicate”, and in addition to hands-free, until the end of time, for then it would not exist in the modern technical means of oral communication. However, the announcement of the Word of God aloud, despite the existence today of refined and powerful communication, is still of primary importance, we would like to say almost sacramental.
Consider the homily of the priest in the Mass or the word of the confessor during confession. They transmit a special grace of light linked to the sacrament, it was also a priest without academic qualifications, as a St. John Vianney or St. Pio of Pietrelcina. For this reason the Church tells us that the Mass heard on TV, as if it were just a show, does not have the same spiritual value of that listened to the physical presence of the celebrant and you can not even confess to phone, as well as Call your doctor to ask advice or help.
It is quite understandable, however, that the apostles themselves, to preserve a better memory, Then they thought of putting or writting the words of the Lord. And thus was born the New Testament, ie Scripture, which is added to that of the Old Testament, born in the same way, though not lacking circumstances, in which God commands us to write [eg. Dt 6,9; 11,20]. Even in Revelation the Lord commands to write [19,9: 21,5].
Yet the order of Christ to preach and then to transmit voice, remains valid. And indeed, the Magisterium divinely assisted by the Holy Spirit, Magisterium, by order of Christ, has the task of preserving, to interpret and explain the data is infallibly of Tradition that of Scripture: “Whoever listens to you, hears me” [LC 10,16]. Therefore missed Luther to want to interpret Scripture without regard to the mediation of the Church and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre wrong to want to interpret the tradition regardless of those developments that were made by the Second Vatican Council.
It is certainly this kind of traditionalism that the Pope referred in his address to the synod. However, we must say that not every traditionalism is wrong. In fact, nothing and nobody prevents to conceive a healthy conservatism, which, without in any way reject the doctrines of the new Council correctly interpreted, try a special interest in pre-conciliar traditions still valid, especially if related to the immutability of the dogma, which could be resumed remeasured with utility for the Church of our time.
The lefevriani confused with modernism - Which is also present in Catholicism today - that healthy progressivism in doctrine and Christian life, which was promoted by the Council, that can make us talk about a healthy progressivism, as for example that of a Maritains, one Spiazzi, a Ratzinger and a Congar, next to a healthy conservatism, as was that of the Servant of God Father Tomas Tyn, to which I devoted a biography, published in 2007 by Faith&Culture: “Father Tomas Tyn. A traditionalist post-conciliar” [see which], a seemingly odd title, which was not understood by all, I studied with the greatest attention and which I have not regretted it at all. It means that a healthy conservatism is not at all uncomfortable in the post-conciliar Church, but, remembering and preserving that which can not die or mutate, gives a valuable and indispensable contribution to the good of the Church, in reciprocity with a healthy progressivism, springing from what does not pass; while conversely a bad traditionalism stop the march of history, does not include the value of the new, mummification the perennial, confuses the unchanging with the inaction, the firmness with stiffness, the solid with petrified, the store with conservatism, loyalty with backwardness, progress with subversion and, to be steadfast in the past, is not capable of grasping the values and problems of the present and the hopes of the future.
We wish the Holy Father, which is located in the middle of the bitter conflict of modernists and lefevriani, to be able to operate effectively, with the intercession of Mary Queen of Peace, to reconcile these two opposing parties, that are tearing apart the Church, so that the tradition and progress can dutifully work together for a healthy renewal and a healthy modernity expanding Church towards increasingly amp horizons of justice and peace.