Fr R on intellectual pride

[james03]

I dunno...Fr R seems to be echoing the sentiments of St. John Eudes:

And I disagree.  The fall of Israel can be traced back to King Solomon worshiping an idol.  Furthermore this results in a Catch 22.  The only way we could get out of our current situation is if we got a good Pope and good bishops.  However since we are in this morass, we will get the leaders we deserve, so we are stuck with a crappy Pope (whoever that is) and crappy bishops -- forever.  Seems like an very unstable system.  I'm not buying it.

One last thing is the observation of real life.  A great military unit has a great leader with high standards.  The soldiers' character has no bearing on his selection.  You get a good leader and the soldiers will form a great unit.  So yeah, I disagree with the Saint.

[james03]

And I disagree with your characterization of post-graduate education.  Women's Studies is a joke.  Medicine is not a joke.  Law is not a joke.  Business is not a joke.  Nursing is not a joke.

Fair enough, however Business is usually a joke.  The only exception is if you take someone with real world experience, like an engineer, and send him to get an MBA.  THAT is very beneficial.  However most MBA's don't end up accomplishing much.  You also left out the Liberal Arts.  Grab number, 95% of the programs are worthless.  Some are excellent.  But that's a small number.  Law can be good in certain situations.  You need a decent school and good connections.  A lot of law students are getting royally hosed.  We agree that STEM is still good in the USA.

[Non Nobis]

Intellectual humility includes having real respect for the thinking of others who have greater wisdom and authority (as well as knowledge, intellect, and education, and especially holiness) than we do.  In the "old days" this would have included the Pope and clergy.  Even today traditionalists generally seem to have this respect for traditionalist priests.

You should never follow even a truly qualified authority into error, but you can pause and give extra thought before you rush into trying to "figure everything out by yourself" and having too much confidence in your thinking (not in your logic, perhaps, but in your premises concerning matters beyond your knowledge and understanding). Given that our so-called authorities are so awful today, I think trads (and other struggling Catholics) sometimes try to build their own intellectual edifice based mostly  on their own thinking - doing private interpretation of the Bible and of past Church teaching. I think modern priests, who should be qualified authorities and guides, were not properly taught in the seminaries, where the teaching should have used the traditional Catholic methods and followed true Catholic teachers.  I would think that it was at least partly pride that ruined the seminaries too - following novel teachers with the goal of "freedom", rather than having intellectual docility towards the great Catholic thinking of the past.

But you can't deny your own reason and accept error only because some  "authority" taught it.  You need to proceed humbly and cautiously and prayerfully, with a docile attitude but ever alert to what is clearly contrary to Church teachings and solid thinking of the past.

You have to seek and stand firm for truth, but sometimes you might have to admit that "you just don't know", e.g. when it comes to the difficulties of the Church today, or matters that are beyond man's understanding (e.g. a full understand of God and His workings).

"False intellectual humility" might include laziness, self-deprecation, skepticism about knowing truth, and cowardice in standing up for it. A secret pride can also hide itself behind a veneer of humility.

[Maximilian]

However since we are in this morass, we will get the leaders we deserve, so we are stuck with a crappy Pope (whoever that is) and crappy bishops -- forever.  Seems like an very unstable system.  I'm not buying it.

You don't have to buy it, you already own it. Look around you. This is reality. It's not going to change until the people change.

One last thing is the observation of real life.  A great military unit has a great leader with high standards.  The soldiers' character has no bearing on his selection.  You get a good leader and the soldiers will form a great unit. 

Wrong. Send General Patton to the wrong country, and he could spend his whole life without ever forming a crack unit. A general has to work with the material he is given. The average American grunt was one of the best in the world. Other countries have never been able to form an effective fighting unit.

So yeah, I disagree with the Saint.

Highly ironic considering this is a thread about "Intellectual Pride."

[Miriam_M]

For the record, I wish to say that I also very much disagree with Fr. R's constant trad bashing, and mostly because he's basing his criticism on a narrow slice of the population that has little in common with the trads I know.  He is simply not accurate in that regard, and it is just as much a form of stereotyping as any other form.

Point #2:  For those easily discouraged, he can be dangerous to listen to, particularly in large quantity, and I've done that to myself recently, which has not always been helpful to my soul.  With regard to doctrine, that's something else, and I find him reliable there.  One just has to be careful with spirituality because he can stress the negative and can (again) stereotype.

Point #3:  I think the point of his mentioning SV'ism was not a blanket condemnation of the position itself, or all those who hold it, but rather the claim of superior knowledge (i.e., certainty) of the illegitimacy of particular popes and the supposedly illegitimate position of sedeplenists.  Although I doubt that he meant that all people who consider SV'ism as a viable option are in fact intellectually prideful, I do think he meant to apply the charge to those who accuse other Catholics of "not using their intellects,"  "not applying logic,"  "being willfully blind," etc.  I do not think it is in itself prideful to wonder why one's own position (whatever the opinion on The Seat) is not more universally accepted.  I do think it is prideful to assume that people who are not "certain" or unquestioning about The Seat are refusing to use their intellects (an act of will), mentally deficient (an insult), etc. 

There are certain aspects of Fr. Ripperger that I admire.  Other aspects i find problematic or a cause for caution.  I didn't mean my remarks to stir such controversy, and I'm sorry that apparently they have.

[james03]

Wrong. Send General Patton to the wrong country, and he could spend his whole life without ever forming a crack unit. A general has to work with the material he is given. The average American grunt was one of the best in the world. Other countries have never been able to form an effective fighting unit.

Actually he would form an effective force.  We're assuming he has the same materials (tanks, etc...).  But what about the flip side?  Is it your position that if you send in a worthless officer that takes over a unit the unit won't turn into a bunch of slackards?  Of course they will.  So what happens when you get worthless Popes that allow fags to run around and heretics to write?

Highly ironic considering this is a thread about "Intellectual Pride."

And this thread is about how Fr. R. went too far, e.g. sit quietly and accept Bergoglio's teaching on divorce.  As far as the Saint, is it our Faith that he is infallible?  Was he a Doctor of the Church?  Even that didn't stop St. Thomas from being wrong.

edit: 

It's not going to change until the people change.

But according to the Saint they will perpetually have bad leaders, so how is that supposed to happen?  Won't it be intellectual pride to disregard our faggot bishops and heresy spewing "Pope"?

[james03]

[11] The Lord therefore said to Solomon: Because thou hast done this, and hast not kept my covenant, and my precepts, which I have commanded thee, I will divide and rend thy kingdom, and will give it to thy servant.

[bigbadtrad]

I dunno...Fr R seems to be echoing the sentiments of St. John Eudes:

"The most evident mark of God's anger, and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world, is manifest when He permits His people to fall into the hands of a clergy who are more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. They abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world and, in their saintly calling of holiness, they spend their time in profane and worldly pursuits. When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people and is visiting His most dreadful wrath upon them."

Yes I knew the quote in advance and I thank you for providing it friend. The problem is not with the quote but the understanding of it is how we can square this with the many quotes from other saints, namely, the evils of the world start with the evils of the priesthood. God can raise up a St. Paul or the world can get a Martin Luther or Arius. Our goal is the harmonize the saints as best as possible without ever looking for an error. Even if one exists we should humbly present the opposite so as not to be their judge who are our judge at judgement time.

As I mentioned St. Aelred said the evils of the world are the evils of the priests. Read Dignity and Duties of the Priest by St. Alphonsus and he quotes many many many saints to the same belief. He has an entire chapter on this very topic.

I believe it best to understand this quote with the history of St. Anthony Mary Claret, the saint I believe is the prototype of fixing the crisis we are in.

If God sends us good leaders and we reject them, God will then send us terrible priests to show us our depravity, as a means to help us realize the spiritual goodness we threw away. The only way out is to bring back good clerics to shine light in the darkness.

Cuba fell into great sin and its clerics fell into concubinage. Many of the faithful weren't practicing and the priests were losing their mind in lust. When St Anthony arrived he went door to door of each church, speak to the priest, and determine their moral and theological fitness. He removed almost every priest and sent them to Havana for formation.

People yelled at him, they wanted their priests, their sacraments, and he was now denying them. His response? It's better to convert pagans than heretics quoting St. Thomas's Summa Contra Gentiles. Bad clerics would turn the faithful into heretics who believe they held the faith but didn't, whereas pagans who are colder are closer to God through their coldness and therefore easier to convert.

The people deserved it, they got their evil clerics as St. John said, but the light of restoration was a great leader through grace. Grace and holiness cannot be a movement from the bottom up. There is no such thing as lay restoration of the faith. At best the laity can preserve the faith in the face of evil as in the time of the Arians, and the Japanese. Nevertheless, even during Arianism many lost their faith. St. Athanasius's famous sermon "they have the churches we have the faith" is a call to greatness in a feeling of despair.

While it was the faithful who mainly preserved the faith during Arianism, there would never be a restoration to greatness without clerics who provide grace "gratia gratum faciens" (if my memory remembers that correctly) through their holiness and radiation of charity. A Mass said by St. John Vianney would deliver far more graces to the faithful and to the world than by an ordinary priest.

Saints spark restorations, not arguments, intelligence, or any other means. "The mind is not a vessel to be filled by a fire to be ignited." -St. Gregory the Great

[Xavier]

St. John Eudes is teaching us (1) if people live badly, we risk being given bad Shepherds. But on the contrary (2) if we do penance and return to God with our whole hearts, He will without doubt give us good Shepherds. This is plain from the passage of Scripture he cites and how the Saint continues. Imagine if the Church had an Army not only of Popes, Bishops and Priests, but even of Nuns, Monks and Laity as St. John describes below.

http://protectthepope.com/?p=10021

"When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people, and is visiting His most dreadful anger upon them. That is why He cries unceasingly to Christians, "Return, 0 ye revolting children . . . and I will give you pastors according to my own heart" (Jer. 3, 14-15). Thus, irregularities in the lives of priests constitute a scourge visited upon the people in consequence of sin.'

Good priests are a sign of God's mercy

St John Eudes then goes on to examine the signs of good priests, and their value in God's sight. Here is a selection of some of the qualities of God priests that are particularly needed in these times, which are a sign of divine grace:

On the other hand, the greatest effect of God's mercy, the most precious grace He bestows upon mankind, is to send worthy priests, men after His own heart, seeking only His glory and the salvation of souls. The greatest blessing that God bestows upon a church, the most signal manifestation of divine grace, is to have a saintly shepherd, be he bishop or priest. This is indeed the grace of graces and the most priceless of all gifts for it includes within itself every other blessing and grace. What is a priest after God's heart? He is an inestimable treasure containing an immensity of good things.

'He is an ever burning and shining light set in the candelabra of Mother Church, burning before God and shining before men: burning in his own love for God, shining by his charity for his fellow man; burning with the perfection of his inner life, shining by the perfection of his exterior deportment; burning in fervent prayer for his people, shining by his preaching of the word of God.

The priest is a sun cheering the world by his presence and bearing. He brings heavenly blessings into every heart. He dispels the ignorance and darkness of error and radiates on every side bright beams of celestial light. He extinguishes sin and gives life and grace to the multitudes. He imparts new life to the weak, inflames the lukewarm, fires more ardently those who are aglow with the sacred flame of divine love.

He is an angel purifying, illuminating and perfecting the souls that God has entrusted to him. He is a seraph sent by God to teach men the science of salvation which is concerned only with knowing and loving Almighty God and His Divine Son, Jesus Christ. The priest is an archangel and a prince of the heavenly militia, waging constant war against the devil who strives to drag countless souls into the depths of hell.

He is a captain in the mighty army of God, always ready to battle for the glory of God and the defense of Holy Mother Church. He is ever prepared to lay siege to the world, the flesh and the devil. For him the conquest of kingdoms means only the salvation of souls for each soul is a kingdom more precious than all the empires of the world."

[Maximilian]

I believe it best to understand this quote with the history of St. Anthony Mary Claret, the saint I believe is the prototype of fixing the crisis we are in.

That's not very promising, in that case. St. Anthony did the best he could in Cuba, and "the best" of a saint is a lot, but when he left, he shook the dust off his sandals and predicted terrible things ahead for the island.

Similarly, back in Spain, St. Anthony was the confessor to Queen Isabella II, but things didn't work out too well there either. Both of them were forced to flee to France, where they had to hide from assassins.

Then he had a stroke when he saw what was happening at Vatican I.

So my point is that even a saint with a proven track record of performing miracles cannot change the course of history for a nation or a church that is determined to lose their Faith. When the people are hell-bent on being bent for hell, even a saint cannot stand in front of the mob and stop them as they rush down the broad and easy road that leads to perdition.

[james03]

Here is my main concern: excuse making for problems in the Church.  So yes you can have a good Church with good clergy, and the people can get itchy ears for heresy and become materialistic.  Perhaps their government is run by lazy rulers and stuff like that.

At the same time you can get a bad clergy where the laity are decent.  This was the case in Vat. II and during the previous period.  No one in the laity knew anything about some nut job named Teilhard de Chardin.  We also have the fag clergy problem and the pedo problem.  I'm not making excuses for that.  During that time period 100's of thousands of Catholics would drudge through mud and rain to attend a Eucharistic Congress.  We have the historical photos of that.  I'm not buying that the problem was with the laity.

The only way we can get reform is with good leadership, which I believe will only happen after a schism, but I'm not a prophet.  On the individual basis work on your spiritual life and go to the TLM.  That's the best you can do, but we're not fixing this mess.

As far as Fr. R, good talk except that small part.  Here's a question I would have asked him:  what do you tell your kids when they ask about Bergoglio's teaching on divorce?  You have to tell them something.  Tell them to follow it, or you are guilty of spiritual pride?

I've told mine that it is likely Pope Benedict is still the Pope or we don't have a Pope. 

[bigbadtrad]

That's not very promising, in that case. St. Anthony did the best he could in Cuba, and "the best" of a saint is a lot, but when he left, he shook the dust off his sandals and predicted terrible things ahead for the island.

Thanks for the reply Max. I find that glass half empty. The seminaries were overflowing, piety in the priests, and reformed marriages for thousands of people living in sin.

Similarly, back in Spain, St. Anthony was the confessor to Queen Isabella II, but things didn't work out too well there either. Both of them were forced to flee to France, where they had to hide from assassins.

I fail to understand why that's on him. Christ had assassins. That can't be attributed to His lack of holiness, the same for the Apostles. Success cannot be attributed to the worldly standards.

Then he had a stroke when he saw what was happening at Vatican I.

Amazing you know that too. So few people know this about him, but it's astounding to me. The story I remember, although not perfect, is he never saw so much heresy in his life than among cardinals and bishops at Vatican I.

So my point is that even a saint with a proven track record of performing miracles cannot change the course of history for a nation or a church that is determined to lose their Faith. When the people are hell-bent on being bent for hell, even a saint cannot stand in front of the mob and stop them as they rush down the broad and easy road that leads to perdition.

Christ comes, most of the Apostles flee. Even after Pentecost we read St. John saying in the Revelation to BISHOPS:

"Yet there is one charge I make against thee; of losing the charity that was thine at first.  Remember the height from which thou hast fallen, and repent, and go back to the old ways; or else I will come to visit thee, and, when I find thee still unrepentant, will remove thy candlestick from its place." Revelation 2: 4-5

Read the subsequent chapters where bishops are allowing all other crazy things from fornication, falling prey to idols, Satan is enthroned, etc.. I mean the Desert Fathers believed Christ was to return within 1-2 generations because there was no faith left on earth.

In other words, saints can only do so much. People always fall astray. It's the saints who rise the people up. The people left to their own caprices will fall astray every time. People will always be determined to go to Hell. Its historically true. The people cannot reverse that trend no more than a broken clock can fix itself. Getting the leaders we deserve cannot solve the problem, it's mutually guaranteed annihilation --> bad people --> worse leaders --> worse people --> vicious leaders --> (see how you can't fix that?)

To say we get the leaders we deserve makes no sense. Who is worthy of having a saint lead them? How can you "deserve" the presence of a saint? If it about deserve alone we all deserve Hell and viciousness all the time in mutual destruction.

All saints do is slow down destruction. No saint ever had a lasting effect on the community or the people after their death. The saints just give us a light, a place to shine in God's grace, and good leadership is impossible to deserve.

Ars deserved a drunk slob of a priest for their wickedness. St. John Vianney was not who they deserved, but what they needed. They certainly didn't deserve him.

On the contrary, and here I agree with James, how could the average family deserve Paul VI? All of those souls of priests who left, and families who left the faith deserved that? I have a hard time reconciling myself to use of the word "deserve". Maybe I'm myopic and as always I respect your thoughts Max, always have.

[Quaremerepulisti]

St. John Eudes is teaching us (1) if people live badly, we risk being given bad Shepherds. But on the contrary (2) if we do penance and return to God with our whole hearts, He will without doubt give us good Shepherds. This is plain from the passage of Scripture he cites and how the Saint continues.

It is quite striking to me how, quite often, popular piety, even when allegedly attested to by writings of Saints, involves a complete abandonment of logic.

What in the world is the function of good Shepherds, if not to lead people to God?  But here, we have the existence of good Shepherds being dependent on the people already having returned to God, making their existence superfluous.

[Maximilian]

Similarly, back in Spain, St. Anthony was the confessor to Queen Isabella II, but things didn't work out too well there either. Both of them were forced to flee to France, where they had to hide from assassins.

I fail to understand why that's on him. Christ had assassins. That can't be attributed to His lack of holiness, the same for the Apostles. Success cannot be attributed to the worldly standards.

No, I wasn't blaming St. Anthony. Just the opposite. My point was that even a genuinely holy saint who performed many miracles can only do so much when the people don't want to be converted. When they want, in fact, to be converted away from the Faith and to secular pursuits.

In other words, saints can only do so much. People always fall astray.

Yes, that's more or less what I was saying.

It's the saints who rise the people up. The people left to their own caprices will fall astray every time. People will always be determined to go to Hell. Its historically true. The people cannot reverse that trend no more than a broken clock can fix itself.

Generally this is the case throughout history. But there have been times when it has been the reverse. Sometimes the people cry out to God for relief from their depraved leaders.

During the Great Western Schism, none of the numerous popes ever did anything to resolve the crisis.

To say we get the leaders we deserve makes no sense. Who is worthy of having a saint lead them? How can you "deserve" the presence of a saint?

The American Indians were sent saints to bring them the Gospel on several occasions, sometimes by miraculous means. Father Pierre de Smet says that the Indians deserved this mercy of God due to their great virtue. He says that once an Indian man was converted, it was unthinkable that he would commit another mortal sin.

On the contrary, and here I agree with James, how could the average family deserve Paul VI? All of those souls of priests who left, and families who left the faith deserved that? I have a hard time reconciling myself to use of the word "deserve".

I believe it. Did the average German or Japanese deserve to be fire-bombed? In one sense, their individual culpability doesn't seem so great. But collectively, yes, they were suffering the just retribution for the sins of their nation.

The average Catholic family in 1962 doesn't seem like they were so terrible that they deserved Vatican II and Paul VI, but in fact collectively they were. Just look at the ecstatic reaction to Vatican II at the time. "Good Pope John" was the Time "Man of the Year."

The ecstatic reception of Hitler by the German people led just a few years later to Dresden and then the post-war horrors. The ecstatic reception of John XXIII by the Catholic people led just a few years later to the firebombing of the Catholic religion and the post-Vatican II horrors.

H.L. Mencken said, "Democracy is when the people get what they deserve. And the get it good and hard." People wanted democracy in the Church. They got what they deserved. And they got it good and hard.

Maybe I'm myopic and as always I respect your thoughts Max, always have.

A gracious compliment which I hope to deserve.

[Xavier]

Unamsanctamcatholicam has a nice article on Jer 3:14-15, "Yes, we get the rulers we deserve. But thankfully, that is not the end of the story. "'Return to me,' declares the LORD Almighty, 'and I will return to you," (Zec. 1:3). Let us return to Him with all our hearts, praying for our priests, praying fervently for godly vocations, for rulers, spiritual and temporal, who will acknowledge God in all their ways and be men after God's own heart. Let us remember that God's glory must be sought and honored first, above all else - above the opinions of men, above the fads of the age, above one's own desires. Only when this is the conviction at the heart of the priesthood will this judgment be lifted from us." http://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/2014/02/return-o-ye-revolting-children.html

We see many incidents of the same in Israel's history. The issue imho is not at all who sinned first, Priests or Faithful. Probably the answer is both. But I think the right response is for us to take collective responsibility and now strive together to find the way back to God - all can play a part in the restoration imho, at least by prayer and sacrifice, whether Faithful, Nuns, Priests and Bishops, each in their own way. Each of us must seek and do God's will as best we can in our own state of life, strive to give Him maximum possible glory in all our actions, and implore graces in prayer and sacrifice for the Church and the world. Jesus and Mary have asked increased Holy Hours before the Blessed Sacrament as a simple means that all of us can use and that will hasten the Triumph of the Church. Yes, Priests should lead ideally even in this, but if they fail to do so, nothing prevents us from going to weep before the Eucharistic Lord ourselves and implore graces from Him there.

here, we have the existence of good Shepherds being dependent on the people already having returned to God, making their existence superfluous.

Take the example of the promised future Holy Pope, surely a good Shepherd worth praying and waiting for. Can we say we deserve him today? Probably not. But we can have the confidence that the more we ardently pray, work, believe, hope for and desire his coming, God will hasten it, as He also promised Mother Mariana, and then, in the right order, the Shepherds will set things right. "Pray insistently without tiring and weep with bitter tears in the secrecy of your heart, imploring our Celestial Father that, for love of the Eucharistic Heart of my Most Holy Son and His Precious Blood shed with such generosity, and by the profound bitterness and sufferings of His cruel Passion and Death, He might take pity on His ministers and quickly bring to an end those ominous times, sending to this Church the Prelate that will restore the spirit of Her priests." https://www.michaeljournal.org/articles/roman-catholic-church/item/our-lady-of-good-success

Upon seeing the great moral and spiritual catastrophes impending for the 20th century, Mother Mariana offered her life in sacrifice to God to mitigate the trials as much as possible, and to hasten the sending of the Prelate (the future Holy Pope) who will set things right. It doesn't mean the existence of such Shepherds is superfluous. There are things only the Shepherds can do, God wills it so. It's said if we do our best, God will do the rest. If we do all in our power to pray for restoration and fulfil our duties of state, thus giving glory to God, He will send the Shepherds necessary for full restoration to come.

Mother Mariana, the holy Nun to whom this revelation was made, and her spiritual daughters, were able to participate in imploring and obtaining the graces needed for restoration. All Nuns can do the same, the Faithful as well, and every Priest and Bishop who desires to.