Traditionalists, Infallibility and the Pope by Rev. Anthony Cekada (1995, 2006)
The very men who appear to possess authority in the Church teach errors and impose harmful laws. How reconcile this with infallibility? IF YOU NOW assist regularly at the traditional Latin Mass, it is because you concluded at some point that the old Mass and doctrines were Catholic and good, while the new Mass and modern teachings, somehow, were not.
But (like me) you probably had some initial worries: What if the traditional Mass I go to is not approved by the diocese? Am I defying the legitimate authority in the Church? Am I disobeying the pope?
This is the “authority issue,” and it seems to present a real dilemma. The Church teaches that the pope is infallible in faith and morals. Good Catholics, moreover, obey the laws of the pope and the hierarchy. Bad Catholics pick and choose what laws they want to obey. Yet at the same time, the very men who would appear to possess authority in the hierarchy command us to accept doctrines and a Mass which harm the faith or have other disastrous effects. What is a Catholic to do?
Why Reject the Changes?
In order to solve the dilemma, we should begin by considering what drove us out of our Vatican II parishes in the first place. In most cases, it was either contradiction of established Catholic teaching or irreverence in worship. In other words, we instantly recognized some element of the new religion to be either a doctrinal error or an evil.
And we hardly thought that our objections concerned mere changes in minutiae. The new doctrines, rather, struck us as changes in substance — compromises, betrayals, or direct contradictions of immemorial Catholic teaching. Or we came to regard the new system of worship as evil — irreverent, a dishonor to the Blessed Sacrament, repugnant to Catholic doctrine, or utterly destructive to the faith of millions of souls. Weighty reasons like these — and not mere trifles — were what moved us to resist and reject the changes.
Once we have arrived at this point and recognized (as we do and must) that some official pronouncement or law emanating from post-Vatican II hierarchy contains error or evil, we are, in fact, well on the way to resolving the seemingly thorny issue of authority. Let us examine why.
The very men who appear to possess authority in the Church teach errors and impose harmful laws. How reconcile this with infallibility? IF YOU NOW assist regularly at the traditional Latin Mass, it is because you concluded at some point that the old Mass and doctrines were Catholic and good, while the new Mass and modern teachings, somehow, were not.
But (like me) you probably had some initial worries: What if the traditional Mass I go to is not approved by the diocese? Am I defying the legitimate authority in the Church? Am I disobeying the pope?
This is the “authority issue,” and it seems to present a real dilemma. The Church teaches that the pope is infallible in faith and morals. Good Catholics, moreover, obey the laws of the pope and the hierarchy. Bad Catholics pick and choose what laws they want to obey. Yet at the same time, the very men who would appear to possess authority in the hierarchy command us to accept doctrines and a Mass which harm the faith or have other disastrous effects. What is a Catholic to do?
Why Reject the Changes?
In order to solve the dilemma, we should begin by considering what drove us out of our Vatican II parishes in the first place. In most cases, it was either contradiction of established Catholic teaching or irreverence in worship. In other words, we instantly recognized some element of the new religion to be either a doctrinal error or an evil.
And we hardly thought that our objections concerned mere changes in minutiae. The new doctrines, rather, struck us as changes in substance — compromises, betrayals, or direct contradictions of immemorial Catholic teaching. Or we came to regard the new system of worship as evil — irreverent, a dishonor to the Blessed Sacrament, repugnant to Catholic doctrine, or utterly destructive to the faith of millions of souls. Weighty reasons like these — and not mere trifles — were what moved us to resist and reject the changes.
Once we have arrived at this point and recognized (as we do and must) that some official pronouncement or law emanating from post-Vatican II hierarchy contains error or evil, we are, in fact, well on the way to resolving the seemingly thorny issue of authority. Let us examine why.
The very men who appear to possess authority in the Church teach errors and impose harmful laws. How reconcile this with infallibility? IF YOU NOW assist regularly at the traditional Latin Mass, it is because you concluded at some point that the old Mass and doctrines were Catholic and good, while the new Mass and modern teachings, somehow, were not.
But (like me) you probably had some initial worries: What if the traditional Mass I go to is not approved by the diocese? Am I defying the legitimate authority in the Church? Am I disobeying the pope?
This is the “authority issue,” and it seems to present a real dilemma. The Church teaches that the pope is infallible in faith and morals. Good Catholics, moreover, obey the laws of the pope and the hierarchy. Bad Catholics pick and choose what laws they want to obey. Yet at the same time, the very men who would appear to possess authority in the hierarchy command us to accept doctrines and a Mass which harm the faith or have other disastrous effects. What is a Catholic to do?
Why Reject the Changes?
In order to solve the dilemma, we should begin by considering what drove us out of our Vatican II parishes in the first place. In most cases, it was either contradiction of established Catholic teaching or irreverence in worship. In other words, we instantly recognized some element of the new religion to be either a doctrinal error or an evil.
And we hardly thought that our objections concerned mere changes in minutiae. The new doctrines, rather, struck us as changes in substance — compromises, betrayals, or direct contradictions of immemorial Catholic teaching. Or we came to regard the new system of worship as evil — irreverent, a dishonor to the Blessed Sacrament, repugnant to Catholic doctrine, or utterly destructive to the faith of millions of souls. Weighty reasons like these — and not mere trifles — were what moved us to resist and reject the changes.
Once we have arrived at this point and recognized (as we do and must) that some official pronouncement or law emanating from post-Vatican II hierarchy contains error or evil, we are, in fact, well on the way to resolving the seemingly thorny issue of authority. Let us examine why.