In 2020, we reviewed the initial issue of The Lamp. At the time we applauded the editors’ intentions but felt that the result fell far short of their ambitions. There was too much verbiage about topics like gabbing with Jesuits over wine spritzers in Vienna and too little attention paid to the actual crises racking the Church. I am happy to say that based on some recent articles that can be found online, The Lamp is now beginning to honestly confront the concrete and emotional crises of our day. These are today, first and foremost, the outrageous actions of Pope Francis and his allies in the hierarchy, culminating in the persecution of traditional Catholics throughout the world.
The transformation of this magazine has not been total, of course. Father Ambrose Dobroszi does attempt to address the hot issue of the scope of papal authority but falls into the ultramontane rhetoric of several of the contributors to the first issue – and even gives it radical new expression:
Yet nonetheless, even the mistakes of the pope must be carried out…This is an uncomfortable truth, but it is clearly correct when we examine history…
We even see that papal mistakes do not necessarily detract from the holiness of the pope. I think all of us would rather the Church have taken a harsh punitive strategy earlier on in the abuse crisis, but Saint John Paul II’s decision to distrust accusations against clerics—an error in judgment—is not necessarily a sin. His evident holiness did not guarantee that he made all of the right decisions, nor did his mistakes—or even sins—prevent his canonization. Our Lord willed to construct the Church in such a way that this successor of Saint Peter could grievously misjudge cases of abuse, have the authority to definitively establish a strategy of dealing with abuse cases that has proved disastrous, all while being one of the most apparent and clear examples of sainthood in our times. The pope has the authority to be tragically wrong, whether he is holy or not, and the Church on earth must obey.
In other words, a pope may be a saint regardless of what he does, and the Church must obey him regardless of what he commands. Preposterous formulations like this will not raise the image of Catholicism among outsiders or fallen-away Catholics.
Several other contributions, however, confront directly the tragic and terrible losses caused by Traditionis Custodes and the subsequent banning of the traditional mass in various Catholic dioceses – especially Washington DC. Christopher McCaffrey writes of his parish of St. Francis de Sales and its history. Harry Scherer describes the final Latin Mass at St. Anthony of Padua:
What the archdiocese effectively said to the people of Saint Anthony was Your work is not wanted here… The Sunday traditional Latin mass at Saint Anthony’s was unique because it was primarily driven and coordinated by students at the Catholic University of America down the street…
Yes, the congregants were aware that the Mass was in some sense historic, an occasion they will recall to their grandchildren at a Sunday brunch after a Solemn High Mass decades from now. The sounds from the choir loft were majestic, the smell of incense intoxicating, and the fellowship of friends in worship re-assuring. But the moment was rooted in something deeper than the continuing history of the traditionalist movement, such as it is: the worship of Almighty God through the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary offered in a form of worship handed down to them by their ancestors. That the old women, solitary men and women, zealous students, and bright-eyed couples will no longer gather at Saint Anthony’s is a sorry shame. That the priest’s mellifluous voice will not pronounce the hallowed formulas of this ancient liturgy is cause for grief indeed. Those who came together for the “Final Latin Mass” did not come by their sorrows cheaply—they’re paying for their emotion. Until the next Votive Mass of Thanksgiving to the Most Holy Trinity is offered at Saint Anthony’s, they can rest assured that their rejection of decadent cynicism was their way of keeping to the narrow path.
Most impressively of all, Matthew Walther, the editor of The Lamp, raises explicitly an issue in the mind of so many: Why Benedict Should Speak. To the extent there is still some nimbus of papal status remining about him, it would seem incumbent upon him, regardless of his debility, to take some action, to say something. For Walther points out that Pope Francis and his minions are characterizing Summorum Pontificum in a way that directly contradicts Benedict’s own careful teaching on the subject – in other words, they are lying.
Which is why, with further restrictions upon the traditional Mass rumored for Ash Wednesday, I repeat my central contention that Benedict must speak about his intentions, and that he must do so unequivocally, without regard for the consequences of doing so. Such a clarification from him might not be enough to prevent the enemies of the old Mass from carrying out their plans. And it would certainly not have any obvious juridical force, even if it would expose the central premise of the other side as a preposterous fiction. But it would also be a moment of sublime clarity, and the last desperate fulfillment of that continuing paternal responsibility to which he has alluded.
In this way, The Lamp, perhaps compelled by circimstances, is now squarely facing the tragic and concrete situation of the Church today. Do I even need to mention the other storms raging in and outside of the Church such as the synodal path developments? There is so much to deal with – and so much of it is dismaying! It isn’t as pleasant as writing about a conservative Catholic fantasyland. But it has the merit of being real and true. And after all, it is out of such confrontations that good writing emerges.
Related Articles
No user responded in this post