Je suis Catholique fondamentaliste!

Give me a fellow fundamentalist ANYTIME rather than a progressive liberal clothed in luciferian pseudo-light.

I am a Byzantine fundamentalist. ;-)

In the Catholic Church we have some – many – who believe they possess the absolute truth and they go on sullying others through slander and defamation and this is wrong. I say this because it is my Church. Religious fundamentalism must be combatted. It is not religious, God is lacking, it is idolatrous. What religious leaders need to do is convince people who have these tendencies. Fundamentalism that ends in tragedy or commits crimes is a bad thing but it exists in all religion.

I believe you are reading this quote wrongly.

The above quote suggest that the people who he is railing against do or think two things -
one) they believe they possess the absolute truth, and
two) they sully others through slander and defamation.

or again:
one) they believe they possess the absolute truth, and
two) they are not religious, lacking God, and idolatrous

and the proof of these things are: that they commit crimes.


So he is not talking about people who believe that Jesus is the Truth, and has instituted His church to teach that truth definitively.

he could be talking about someone, oh, say for the sake of argument, a cardinal, who believes that he can set aside the clear teaching of Jesus and his church to promote his own version of the truth, making a God out of something else (like sex), slandering and defaming others who do hold to Jesus' teaching (like laughing at the faithful African prelates) or again a cardinal might who commit crimes (like trying to cover up criminal activities like child abuse).

I am with the Pope on that one. Failing to combat these tendencies in the Church will certainly have tragic outcomes. And so i will continue to oppose people who believe that they, not Jesus, teach the absolute truth, and I will continue to proclaim the absolute truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

And I will continue to pray for our Pope. I tremble at the thought of my own judgement day encounter with the Lord, what must it be like to go to him having been given the care of every living soul on the planet to answer for.

As a musician, I'll take the fundamentals, with all the overtones thrown in. :)

Yes! I do believe in absolute truth - GOD and the LOGOS!

Thanks Chonak for helping in the original understanding of this term and meaning. Perhaps others are confusing a true fundamentalist / orthodox conservative from a fanatic nut!

"Catholic fundamentalist" are found at TLM Masses, but they are in a minority. When vocal, they can be destructive to one's faith and sanity. When they achieve a position of power, they are dangerous.

Yes, I have been told that "My womb was made to create organists." and efforts by the pastor and the director of music to fire one of these teenage organist-created-by-the-womb organists failed and cantors schemed to never, ever, have to sing with this organist.

The Diocesan HR office met with the priest and DM and said, "So, why haven't you fired her?"

At a later date, I was told by the same person a daughter had heard a formed DM of the parish talking to me and she had spoken critically of the family and as a result I had sinned and had to go to confession.

When the TLM Mass moved on to a another parish it was a relief to many.

Now this sounds like an episode from the Twilight Zone. It's very sad that your experience with the TLM was so negative, Noel. I might tentatively submit that while every demographic has its fruits and nuts, the "Catholic Fundamentalists" I know from my generation (in their 40's and 50's) who come from both the EF and the OF, don't seem that loopy to me, though, of course, everything is relative. Oops---everything is relative but the moral absolutes, that is.

Surprisingly, my mother also cried "My womb was made to create organists."

However it was phrased: "MY womb was made to create……ORGANISTS???" She was incredulous - looking for a quarterback but only getting passing tones. Sigh!

Fundamentalism and fundamentalists exist.
They are persons who believe in a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation account(s) (but don't observe the Mosaic dietary laws); who have a very Pauline concept of women and a literal view of most of our Lord's acts (but cough and sputter over 'This is My Body', etc.); they are people who believe that if they observe all the rules and regulations of the Church (but have not love, compassion, forgiveness, etc;) they are destined for heaven as surely as the right 'combination' unlocks the lock; they are those who delight in every facet of canon law but have hearts of stone. They are those who think that the EF is, sui generis, more efficacious than the OF; or, conversely, those who think that their version of the OF is more genuine than the EF. And then, there are those who believe, for one reason or another, that they are 'more Catholic (or more Protestant) than thou' and, therefore, closer to God. One could go on, and I trust that any of our forum companions could add a few things to the list - but the point is made. Fundamentalism is a substitute for a living, loving, spirituality. It is a love of adiaphora that exceeds the love of what they represent; of the outward and visible sign more than the inward and spiritual grace. This is, I think, what our holy father meant to address. We are not accustomed to popes speaking so informally. The fact that this one does is both refreshing and didactic. Sometimes the wording may lack finesse (and politesse), but the substance is spot on - every time.

Oh, yes, there are Traddie fundies. They are the ones who--inter alia--KNOW that singing a Chant Mass is forbidden if one is a member of the congregation.

While it's fine that our Pope deigns to enlighten us constantly on the evils of a flawed and superficial Christian dogmatism, it would be equally beneficial to be reminded of the evils of moral relativism, but somehow that never gets mentioned.

In the Bergoglian worldview it would seem that the only really evil people are those who have a strict Judeo-Christian moral code and believe in moral absolutes. It does not seem to occur to him that it is possible for people who believe in a literal interpretation of the Scriptures, uphold the Ten Commandments, adhere to Gospel values and attend the Latin Mass to be at the same time kind, compassionate, cheerful, honest, honorable, equitable and rational.

Could this be because Pope Francis never met any preconciliar Catholics who practised their religion well? That is truly unfortunate since those sour, mean, hypocritical, self-righteous folks helped create a man who equates traditional Catholic dogma with a skewed, dysfunctional, shriveled form of Catholicism.

However, since everyone must have dogmatic principles and moral absolutes of one kind or another, Papa Bergoglio has, in reaction to his own life experiences, obviously formed his own dogma and moral code by which he operates and judges the world---the only problem being that nobody is really 100% sure if the Bergoglian dogma and moral code is the same as what one might reasonably expect of a Roman Catholic pontiff. Certainly, this pope's obvious antipathy for rules, laws and doctrine is disconcerting, to say the least, and makes one wonder how far his antinomian antagonism will lead him in the end.

One lesson I see in all of this: the validation yet again of lex orandi statuat legem credendi et vivendi. It's a darn shame the preconciliar Latin-Mass-going Catholics of Pope Bergoglio's past were apparently such wicked people. One does not get the same impression of Pope Benedict's upbringing, in whose native country the Liturgical Movement was quite strong. Perhaps if the Liturgical Movement had been influential in Argentina, Pope Francis would have a different perspective of traditional Catholicism? Perhaps if the preconciliar Catholics of Argentina had been well instructed in the "active participation in the most holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church," then perhaps they could have been more able to assimilate the mysteries of Christ and His Church in a way that would make their lives resonate with faith and love.

As Catherine de Hueck Doherty said so well in 1938, speaking of the Vetus Ordo, "in the liturgy we learn to know Christ. And if we truly know Him, we shall recognize Him everywhere, but especially in His poor, and we shall set our faces toward the liberation of Him from the yoke of injustice and pain, helping to bring about the reign of Christ the King in this world. And with it order, peace and love, so that we shall be able to say: "I saw Christ today, and He was smiling."

Let me repeat that in my own words: "I saw Christ today at the traditional Latin Mass, and He was smiling." That is my experience at the Latin Mass I attend and that ought to be the experience of the usus antiquior that we endeavor as EF musicians to share with the world.

JulieColl and CharlesW - I whole heartedly agree!

Hi, Julie,

I published an article on the subject of Catholic "fundamentalism" two issues ago in The Latin Mass. Here's a PDF:
https://www.academia.edu/14468171/Thoughts_on_Catholic_Fundamentalism_

God Bless,
Peter

Oh, yes, there are Traddie fundies. They are the ones who--inter alia--KNOW that singing a Chant Mass is forbidden if one is a member of the congregation.

I can see some sense in this....really. They see it as a slippery slope which the church opened up that created Haugen and Hass.

It could be any of them: but maybe the problem is in being too particular.

You don't call someone a "Fundamentalist" to his face unless you're trying to insult them, or otherwise start a fight. It's one of those labels that tells us more about the user than the target. A universal definition is futile.

In His Nov. 30 remarks, the Holy Father is saying is that he is against Fundamentalism, then effectively invites us to fill that category with our bêtes noire. He is adopting a stance as the liberator from whatever bothers you about the Catholic tradition - as a practical matter having to do with sexual activity rather the role of, say, labor unions in the economy.

Where he goes with this remains to be seen.

actually wombs produce organisms...

...which have organs.

I take it you don't live in the deep south...

That is a compliment, not an insult to many southerners.

There is a big difference between slandering and defaming non-believers and mission activity. Teaching the truth to them is something that has been a significant part of the church's mission until recent times.

No, I'm guilty of a lot of things, Chris, but perpetrating slander and defamation is not my usual modus operandi. The problem is that the Pope's statement contains a false equivalence. If I remember my logic class correctly; he is pairing fundamentalism and slander together on an equal basis so one assumes they are both evil. On another occasion, he paired fundamentalism with rigidity and neurosis so that is the same dynamic.

So, if you're a fundamentalist who doesn't slander or defame people, or you're a fundamentalist but not rigid and neurotic, then you're okay?

You know, it seems to me, unless I'm missing something, that every time the Pope speaks about the traditional wing of the Church, there's always vituperation and a negative connotation.

Didn't we hear numerous sermons denouncing those legalist, pharisaical Catholics which statements were widely interpreted as meaning those Catholics who are against the Kasper proposal? Hasn't he also spoken of "the closed hearts which frequently hide even behind the Church’s teachings or good intentions, in order to sit in the chair of Moses and judge"?

This, taken with his remarks against neurotic seminarians which could without much difficulty be taken to refer to traditional seminarians, along with his remarks about those attached to obsolete rites which are no longer culturally relevant, make people wonder what kind of straw man he's trying to set up and knock down.

To whom he is referring? What part of the Church is he talking about? Who are the doctors of the law? Are they people who believe in the indissolubility of marriage and the Church's teaching on who may or may not receive Communion? Who are these Catholic fundamentalists he is denouncing? Are they people who refer to Ludwig Van Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma and take it seriously?



Are they people who believe that theological opinions should be judged whether they are in line with the doctrine found in standard dogmatic manuals such as Denziger Schonmetzer?



Finally, should seminarians and priests who own copies of these books as well as copies of "culturally obsolete" liturgical books revert to the bad old days of hiding these things in paper bags and in the back of their lockers and of not discussing or being seen with them for fear of reprisals?

The question must be asked, are we headed back to the bad old days of McCarthyite witch hunts against clerics who are suspected of attachment to these things?

Just askin'.

I know a lot of people who call themselves 'fundamentalists'. Yes, some of them are loud and judgmental. (So are some liberals, some evangelicals, unitarians, postmen, pet lovers...) Most of them are not.

Chris

I think MD's distinction starts with people who embrace a fundamentalist identity as a positive thing per se.

Michael,

I would suggest that while what you say is true, being part of one of the mentioned groups is also NOT prevention from being judgmental.

The problem is that the term fundamentalist can be used pejoratively, to mean someone who is too stupid to be nuanced, because if they really understood the nuances of the situation they would agree with the opinion of the person throwing around the term fundamentalist in the pejorative.
I have always held that when the Holy Spirit convicts us of sin he does so in a precise way, helping us to repent of specific wrong actions, attitudes, motivations etc. It is the evil one who spreads a vague fog of condemnation, which leads to nothing but gloom, introspection, and slacking off from the pursuit of virtue.
however i also believe that 'God works all things for the good of those who love him' and my final take away from the Pope on this one is to be sure that when I have an opportunity to comment, critique, teach or otherwise have input into an ecclesiastical situation, that I do my utmost to be precise, grounded in the Magisterium, Scripture, the writings of the saints and so on. I will ask the Holy spirit to give me wisdom and discernment of spirits, and courage to speak forthrightly, even to those in power.
And it just dawned on me that I should start praying and fasting for the Cardinal electors in the next conclave now. I didn't pray much the last time.