|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 10, 2023 19:33:24 GMT
Your definition of "modernism" is somewhat novel, but I suppose if I'm going to stretch the definition of "traditionalism", I cannot challenge your use of a term in a way that it's not typically used. I don't "go against anything from Vatican II and after" --- I read Vatican II, as I do any other Church teachings, in light of the analogia fidei, how it meshes with what was taught before. I use older translations of the Bible, and older catechisms, in tandem with more recent ones, and "Holy Ghost" is not confined to traditional Catholics, many Protestants use that term as well, to-wit, Jimmy Swaggart (admittedly, not the best role model, though I do respect how he publicly "owned up to" his indiscretions and made no excuses for them) and some African American evangelicals. You hear "Holy Ghost" all the time in the Southern US (where I live). Indeed, one diocesan parish church in Knoxville, Tennessee, retains its old name of "Holy Ghost" (BTW, the TLM is offered there every Sunday, alongside the Novus Ordo, one in Swahili, no less).
Part of modernism involves breaking up religion into components (e.g., aesthetics, contemplation, etc.), democracy (e.g., individual liberties, or opting for another form of the Mass and so on, in the name of breaking up religion into components, e.g., arguing that one is aesthetically pleasing or "sacred" compared to the other), and emphasizing on what's older to create the impression of fostering tradition for its own sake, e.g., older translations of the Bible aren't accurate, older catechism doesn't deal with recent issues, recent catechism deals with them in light of older catechism, and Catholics aren't Protestants.
Do you have a citation for this, or are these just your own personal reflections?
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Nov 11, 2023 1:59:22 GMT
Part of modernism involves breaking up religion into components (e.g., aesthetics, contemplation, etc.), democracy (e.g., individual liberties, or opting for another form of the Mass and so on, in the name of breaking up religion into components, e.g., arguing that one is aesthetically pleasing or "sacred" compared to the other), and emphasizing on what's older to create the impression of fostering tradition for its own sake, e.g., older translations of the Bible aren't accurate, older catechism doesn't deal with recent issues, recent catechism deals with them in light of older catechism, and Catholics aren't Protestants.
Do you have a citation for this, or are these just your own personal reflections?
These are helpful:
_The Passion of the Western Mind_ by Richard Tarnas
_From Dawn to Decadence_ by Jacques Barzun
_Modern Times, Modern Places_ by Peter Conrad
Grad level material:
_The Postmodern Condition_ by Jean-Francois Lyotard
_Simulacra and Simulation_ by Jean Baudrillard
_Postmodernism_ by Fredric Jameson
_A Thousand Plateaus_ by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 11, 2023 3:21:42 GMT
Do you have a citation for this, or are these just your own personal reflections?
These are helpful:
_The Passion of the Western Mind_ by Richard Tarnas
_From Dawn to Decadence_ by Jacques Barzun
_Modern Times, Modern Places_ by Peter Conrad
Grad level material:
_The Postmodern Condition_ by Jean-Francois Lyotard
_Simulacra and Simulation_ by Jean Baudrillard
_Postmodernism_ by Fredric Jameson
_A Thousand Plateaus_ by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari
That's quite the bibliography. Aside from Barzun, I have never even heard of any of these men. If I had a reason to question your bona fides --- which I do not --- I would call this a "gish gallop", but again, I assume you are sincere in all of this. Whatever is in these works, if you are able to glean from them a defense of everything the Church has done in recent years, in the face of those who object (including many bishops and people who are eminent scholars in their own right), and recast "Catholic traditionalism" (according to its most commonly accepted definition) as being a species of modernism, I say go for it. I know you seek to defend the mind of the modern Church with any means at your disposal, and that you like the direction that the Church has taken, and I don't think anyone is going to dissuade you from that. I would, however, be interested in knowing if any of these works specifically treat of the situation in the Catholic Church in our time. They very well may. Please share this with citations if that is the case.
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Nov 12, 2023 2:02:38 GMT
These are helpful:
_The Passion of the Western Mind_ by Richard Tarnas
_From Dawn to Decadence_ by Jacques Barzun
_Modern Times, Modern Places_ by Peter Conrad
Grad level material:
_The Postmodern Condition_ by Jean-Francois Lyotard
_Simulacra and Simulation_ by Jean Baudrillard
_Postmodernism_ by Fredric Jameson
_A Thousand Plateaus_ by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari
That's quite the bibliography. Aside from Barzun, I have never even heard of any of these men. If I had a reason to question your bona fides --- which I do not --- I would call this a "gish gallop", but again, I assume you are sincere in all of this. Whatever is in these works, if you are able to glean from them a defense of everything the Church has done in recent years, in the face of those who object (including many bishops and people who are eminent scholars in their own right), and recast "Catholic traditionalism" (according to its most commonly accepted definition) as being a species of modernism, I say go for it. I know you seek to defend the mind of the modern Church with any means at your disposal, and that you like the direction that the Church has taken, and I don't think anyone is going to dissuade you from that. I would, however, be interested in knowing if any of these works specifically treat of the situation in the Catholic Church in our time. They very well may. Please share this with citations if that is the case.
Peter Conrad gives a very good idea about the points I raised, but he refers mostly to art. It's Tarnas that goes beyond that and explains how fragmentation took over. Meanwhile, Barzun focuses more on art and history, and there's also Harold Bloom, which sees Shakespeare's _Hamlet_ as the beginning of individuality.
The rest illustrate that fragmentation, from Lyotard's view of the postmodern condition as a virtual economy to Baudrillard and simulations, to Jameson and the manner by which capitalism itself has turned tradition, among others, upside down, to Deleuze and Guattari's "deterritorialization," i.e., human identity itself fragmented.
And so on. In contrast is what I'm sure is the sincere view that this is all my personal opinion, and implicitly, uninformed.
If any, what I did learn from all these is that "Catholic traditionalism" has been changing from the start. Even the idea of "Catholic" came up much later. And what's propagandized frequently across multiple platforms is a call to return to at most the nineteenth century, and made by a very small number of Catholics that happen to come from the U.S., with a few from France, Britain, and Canada.
|
|