Saturday, June 22, 2013

Catholic Answers' misadvised attack on 'Radical Traditionalism'

Peter Crenshaw, "Open Season on ‘Radical Traditionalism’" (The Remnant, June 10, 2013) offers a detailed account and critique of the attack by Patrick Coffin and Tim Staples on a full two hour radio show on May 31 ran by “Catholic Answers Live.” According to Crenshaw's account (as well as Michael Matt's below), the whole thing was a tapestry of misinformation unworthy of Karl Keating's worthy apostolate, though I doubt mainstream listeners would have had the wherewithal to make that judgment:


Update: Christopher A. Ferrara, "A Catholic Answer to Catholic Answers" (The Remnant, July 24, 2013).


6 comments:








Ralph Roister-Doister

said...

I don't know about Coffin, but Tim Staples is another neo-Cath convert of bad formation -- which is the only kind of formation available in the Church nowadays.

Bad formation is that which summarizes that Catholic and protestant are merely Frick and Frack of the Church of God. And 'Catholic Answers' is more neo-Cath Grub Street.





Ralph Roister-Doister

said...

Neo-Cath Grub Street is a term coined by me to indicate a problem with the modern laicist spirit that originated in documents of putative Catholic theology such as "Razing the Bastions," and reached aggiornagasm in the outcome of V2. The past few decades have seen the ascendency of a species of semi-journalistic apologists who are paid under ”Catholic” auspices of one sort or another to state the "Catholic" position on a whole range of faith and religioethical issues. Miraculously, their message inevitably falls into lock step with the current Catholic powers-that-be, even when that regime contradicts the last one. Neo-Cath Grub Street, in America, is the laicist arm of AMChurch, the USCCB, and the “Church of Christ,” which “subsists” in the Roman Catholic Church – a distinction which was never thought necessary or even intelligible before the second Vatican Council.

It may seem coincidental that so many of these paid apologists are former protestants. I do not believe it is. In an age when Church leaders are trying in various fumbling ways to "protestantize" their Church -- softpedalling or altogether ignoring the hard facts of Catholic doctrine in order to sweet talk the separated brethren, tossing Catholic traditions into the boneyard in order to embrace doofus versions of protestant affectations -- in such an effort, who better to serve as apologists for the emerging polyglot than erstwhile protestants lately formed not in the Roman Catholic faith and tradition of the ages, but in the soupy, self-contradicting rhetoric of the latest, greatest council.

For all of its craven buffoonery, Neo-Cath Grub Street is a threat to the Roman Catholic Church that created it.





JM

said...

RDD:

1. aggiornagasm ... ROFLOL.

2. "to sweet talk the separated brethren" I do not think this is 100 percent accurate, since as I Protestant I knew no one who was interested in being sweet-talked by Rome. It is again one of those instances where Rome is all about schmoozing others under pretense of dialogue that no one even asked for, so the 'dialogue' actually means compromise.

3. "lock step with the current Catholic powers-that-be" Yes, it is Pope-as-Mormon Prophet phenomenon, ironic since all the Vatican II theologians dissented from the conservative papal pronouncements of their own day.





I am not Spartacus

said...

CPAs (Converts from Protestantism Apologists) are forever cooking the Ecclesiastical Ledgers and counting the debt of abandoned Tradition as the Profit of protestantised ecumenism - a universal solvent.

The Advent of the death of Conservative Catholicism is here and Pope Francis is the stake about to be run through its heart





I am not Spartacus

said...

These CPAs are very busy persons; whether it is Mark Brumley of Ignatius Press pulling a book by Ralph Martin that trashed von Balthasar's ideas about Hell; or whether it is Tim Staples excommunicating those who merely adhere to all that came before V2 or whether it is Mark Shea inventing his unique Dual Covenant Theory or vigorously defending the Assisi meetings or viciously attacking anyone who dares disagree with his personal opinions; but, no matter which CPA is beating whatever dead horse he rode into the Catholic Church on, I think it is safe to say that Shea is still the biggest CPA of all.





Scott W.

said...

It is again one of those instances where Rome is all about schmoozing others under pretense of dialogue that no one even asked for, so the 'dialogue' actually means compromise

Indeed the very architecture of my local AmChurch chapter screams this. Behind the altar is an enormous modern bas-relief of Our Lord ascending (i.e. doing the "touchdown" pose.) The tabernacle is off to the side and is a plaster thing that looks like a remedial art project. Colored glass sans saints. I think it was built in the 80's when the boozing on ecumenicism was on its sixth martini.

But a funny thing has happened: As those denominations we were trying to schmooze continued to careen off into Leftist Looneyland, the need for ecumenicism is disappear and lo and behold, my AmChurch is in the process of remodeling the sanctuary into a more recognizably Catholic tradition. Granted, we still hear the announcement before Mass: "We are in need of ten [you heard me, ten] more Eucharistic ministers", but it seems the tectonic plates are inching in the right direction.