There’s No Wobblying In Heaven: On The Dangers For The Church.
Father Ray Blake has another very thoughtful post about the “wobbly” Church, and the danger “experiments” like Francis’ papacy represent for the Faith.
This part is enlightening:
I really am beginning to think that the Papacy, which Vatican II saw as the unitative, if it becomes innovative becomes self-destructive. The very purpose of the Papacy is to conserve that which was handed on to it. In the first millennium the faith of the City of the Two Apostles stood still whilst the world revolved, its lack of innovation made it the touchstone of orthodoxy during the Arian and Iconoclastic crisis and enabled it to be the memory of the Tradition of the whole Church. If the Church of Rome becomes the source of innovation can it also be the touchstone of unity? If not where can we find that unity, which after all was promised us by Christ? Can it exist outside of unity with Rome? The answer Orthodoxy and ‘ultra-Catholics’ come up with is that it exists within the Tradition itself, are ordinary Catholics going to come up with the same answer?
I allow myself to give my two cents (actually, and thank Goodness, my two pence) on this.
“Church” to me means – when referred to the organisation in its entirety, not to the church building, or the diocese, etc – two separate concepts: the heavenly Jerusalem, and the earthly one.
I look – like all Traditionalist, bar none – at the heavenly one for my instruction, and put all my hope on Her. My understanding – which I try to constantly improve and deepen – of the heavenly Jerusalem will, then, be the thermometer, or the metre, with which I measure, or observe, the state of health of the earthly one; well knowing that whilst the heavenly Jerusalem is beyond any danger of corruption, the earthly one is threatened at all times by the schemes of the devil, and the general weakness of the human nature; and in particular, the stupidity and vanity of men.
I could never – and I would consider it atrocious if anyone did it – do things the other way round, and allow the vagaries and weaknesses of the earthly Jerusalem to influence my perception of the heavenly one.
Up above, in heaven, is the perfect blueprint of what the Church should be on earth. The way the actual earthly building reflects the perfect construction plans given to it by the Divine Architect may vary from age to age, and it varies brutally at times, according to the ability and good will of those in charge of the building site: the maintenance work, the piping, the draining, the heating, the cabling, the gardens, the roof, and the windows. But when you look at the proficiency of the builder or the restoration company you look first at the plans, and from there you see how good or bad the builder’s work was.
There is no other way. There could never be another one. To do any differently would be to say, or to entertain a doubt, that the builder may have a say in how the planning is done. It isn’t, and he hasn’t.
The Architect has made the plan. The builders must stick to the plan. If they don’t, they are a disgrace. That’s all there is to know.
We are now in the hand of drunken, blaspheming, careless building contractors who have been put in charge of the maintenance, but really do not care a straw for the edifice. They go around breaking windows, because they have noticed that the mob likes the sound of splintered glass. They also do not care whether the Architect of the immense building exists or not, and probably think the building “just got there out of nothing”. It is perfectly irrelevant to them whether the edifice will still be in any half-decent state of repair in one generation or two. But when they break another window, the mob applauds, and gives them money to eat, drink, and be merry. That’s another window going, then…
This is all very sad; and, for the avoidance of doubt, yours truly would, if he had his way, have all those who have contributed to the dereliction and devastation of the building flayed to the blood, with the only exception of those of whom the Architect has stated that they shall not be touched.
The workers on the building site are drunken, and arrogant, and stupid. But not for one moment we think they should have any say in how the building should look like. This is, simply, not for them to say.
This is why the building contractors can become as drunk as you please, and break as many windows in their juvenile, demented stupidity as they want.
We know, and we will always know, how the building plans looks like, how the building is supposed to look, and what is necessary to proceed to its proper maintenance and restoration.
Francis is a stupid, drunken, arrogant, socialist, and very probably atheist disaster of a contractor firm director. One day, the Great Chairman In The Sky will punish him as he deserves.
But our faith in the plan remains granitic, untouched by drunken vagaries, and ready to battle against the drunken builders.
There is no other way to see the matter. Everything else would not be Catholic, but Anglican. It would be to allow the swine to define the function and value of the pearls. It would be just stupid.
This must, I think, be said very clearly to the average, distracted, lukewarm, and very naive “oh how nice the Pope is” crowds out there.
The only reality is God. What we call “reality” is merely His product. The idea that we can change the reality of things – the reality of the Church, of the Sacraments, of Our Lord’s commands – is as stupid as to think that a drunken builder can evaluate the planning permission of a building, and decide about the changes he likes.
The lukewarm, average Catholics must be said a thing or two about reality. When they get it, they will very naturally stop fighting against it.