Frederick Faber Brings some Good Old-Fashioned…

Frederick Faber Brings some Good Old-Fashioned… October 29, 2015

19th Century honor for the Holy Father.  The Reactionaries who hate Francis’ living guts today have far more in common with Modernists than they do with this guy.


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • antigon

    Viva Pio Nono (& all the faithful who wish no indigestion upon his successors’ entrails)!

  • I don’t hate anybody’s guts. Slinging invective around like “reactionary” is distorting and uninformative.

    People have legitimate concerns.

  • Peggy

    Stop picking fights. Just post the story and quit sitting in judgment of the souls of others.

    • Reader Yesterday

      No, Peggy, he’s making an accurate observation. I didn’t believe it myself that there were people like this until recently. I was on a website — make that *kicked off* a website recently that termed my defense of the traditional teaching of the Church on mercy a “distraction” and the teaching itself as “effeminate” and “ineffective.” Yet the comments calling the pope vile names and accusing him of malice, stupidity and heresy were deemed perfectly acceptable. I don’t think it’s reading souls to call these people reactionaries! I certainly wouldn’t call them “traditionalists” since they are quick to jettison any tradition (like respect for the Holy Father) they don’t like. And since rejecting traditions they no longer find relevant is one of the hallmarks of Modernism, it’s an apt comparison.

      • Peggy

        Two things:
        1. Many people are understandably concerned about what is happening, without hate. They should be allowed to speak–though some professional credentialed Catholics don’t think so.
        2. Mark takes every occasion to make a gratuitous swipe at people with him he disagrees on the right, for whatever reasons. It seems unjust and uncalled for to me.

        • chezami

          Could you tell me where I said people should not be allowed to speak?

          Could you describe for me the difference between my “gratuitous swipe” and Maureen Mullarkey’s wholly merited charge that Francis is a Stalinist and “Che Guevara’s Pope”?

          • Peggy

            For a few years now you have taken gratuitous swipes here at broadly categorized (by you) groups of people with whom you disagree. M.M. will answer for what she says. You did not critique her, you made a vague broad-based charge at no person in particular, but covering many people that may fit the general category, ie, concerned about Francis’ actions and words in this case.

            I generally avoid your site any more. I occasionally can’t help myself and call you out for these broad-based judgments of large swaths of people who wonder why, ie, here, they should be called haters b/c they are disturbed by some things Francis has done. Are we to feel better when you say in response, “I was not talking about you, or your group of people.” Well, thank God. Are we to worry whether we are under your microscope and judgmental eye? I don’t really care what you think about me, but I care that you publish such broadbased swipes and sit in judgment of your fellow man in this way.

            Your books were among those which helped me when I reverted 20 years ago. I appreciate that, but I don’t get where you are any more. I am somewhere else, myself.

            Pax to you and yours.

        • Reader Yesterday

          Thank you for your reply. Bear with me, this might be kind of long. You see, where you are, I was not so long ago. I am a member of an FSSP parish, but I don’t consider myself a ‘trad.’ I dislike labels. I’m Catholic; that’s enough. (Roman Catholic if I need to differentiate between my Chaldean or Maronite friends.)
          Mark’s harping on the perfidy of trads set my teeth on edge and his implication that those of us attached to tradition bear responsibility for policing the loud, bitter, angry subset struck me as unwarranted and unfair. I didn’t know any of those people. They don’t seem to go to my church. They don’t show up on the blogs I read.
          Now, Mark can be a bit enthusiastic when he gets on his high horse. He’s a writer. They do that. My sister’s a writer and she can be the same way. I suspect it’s a kind of catharsis. 🙂
          But as much as I wish it weren’t so, he is right. They must be opposed. I’m really glad he’s using the word ‘reactionary’ to differentiate between the hate-filled from the ordinary ‘trad,’ though.
          Still, I admit it can be difficult to see where he’s coming from. Absent a link to one of the reactionary sites, you might, I suppose, think that posting a reading from Fr. Faber on respect for the pope is directed at all who have concerns. While I don’t think Mark is necessarily interested in those concerns, I feel confident that he would never demonize anyone with those concerns. As the article indicates, he’s concerned with the real lack of respect shown the Holy Father by the groups mentioned.
          Thanks for your patience & God bless you, Peggy!

          • Stu

            You and I are very similar in outlook. Heck, we might even go to the same parish. My thoughts.

            Of course people like that exist. No doubt. Always have and always will. But, if in countering their nonsense you routinely rattle people who you did not intend, perhaps one should consider narrowing their fields of fire a bit and avoid collateral damage. Even better, instead of going after groups or even personal attacks on individual people, simply address bad ideas directly. It just seems the whole world wants to go nuclear when a simply sniper rifle will do.

            • Reader Yesterday

              You raise some very good points.
              .
              FSSP parishes do seem to be very sane and welcoming places, for one thing.
              .
              And yes, Mark sometimes does paint with a very large brush. This particular post; however, I thought reasonable, so was surprised at Peggy’s response. Maybe I’ve grown thicker skin.
              .
              I’ve also been thinking of blogs in general, and this blog in particular, as incubators for ideas. Mark’s more polished pieces; his books and articles, are solid and a joy to read. Generalizations can be a result of sloppy thinking or a result of rapidity of expression, and people who keep a sort of public diary might not always take the time to self edit.
              .
              I enjoyed particularly your closing thought about the world’s desire to go nuclear. In our house we call that ‘drama’: the world’s constant lust for spectacle. Writers (and readers) are not immune. But yes, there are times when invective and hyperbole are not effective.
              .
              I did go on way too long. Thanks for your patience!

          • Peggy

            Reader Yesterday: Thank you for your thoughts. Where I am these days I described in a reply to Mark a few comments below. I do attend an EF once a month or so, but attend my territorial sappy clappy parish generally. I enjoy a by the book novus ordo…but that’s not really what this issue is here for me. It’s another topic in any case.

            God bless you and yours.

    • Jim the Scott

      Where as there might be a handful who offer reasonable and sober & constructive criticism of the Holy Father most of the crap I’ve encountered is fevered hatred.

      Geez with these people around who needs Orangemen?

    • Marthe Lépine

      I am sorry to have to inform you that people who clearly reject the Pope and anything, or most of the things, he is trying to teach are taking positions similar to king Henry VIII, e.g. turning to Protestantism. From things I have been reading on various blogs, I even got the impression that there are people in the US who wish that their country would be able to extend its hegemony to include the Vatican, but such attitude has already been condemned by Pope Leo XIII in his letter against american exceptionalism. Trying to warn reactionaries that they are in danger of finding themselves outside of the Catholic church is not sitting in judgment of their souls. Rather, it would seem to me that it is trying to save their souls before it is too late… (in other words, “admonishing the sinners”, which is a work of spiritual mercy”)

  • egao

    Father Faber! I knew nothing about him until my (Ordinariate) parish posted this article about having to de-Protestantize/”re-Catholicize” the words to “Faith of Our Fathers,” which he wrote. What a great servant of the Church.

    http://www.saintgregoryordinariate.org/ehttpwww-saintgregoryordinariate-orgeye-test-re-catholicizing-a-hymnal/

  • capaxdei

    I think “hate Francis’s living guts” is a reasonable characterization of the spirit behind a lot of on-line comments at websites that aren’t particularly fringe.

    Mark may be more effective if he left out the invective, depending on the effect he’s after, but he is accurate with it here.

    • chezami

      When people go gaga for the charge that Francis is a Stalinist and Che Guevara’s Pope (as One Peter Five’s new doyenne Maureen Mullarkey calls him), they hate Francis’ living guts. Attempts to deny that are lies.

  • Re_Actor

    I seem to recall Chesterton saying somewhere that in the Middle Ages, provided one affirmed that the papacy was indeed the succession of the Vicars of Christ, one was quite at liberty to call the Pope a knave or fool.

  • ivan_the_mad

    “Many virtues grow in secret; but loyalty can only thrive in the bare sunshine and upon the open hills.”

    Very brilliantly put. I cannot now remember by whom, but when I was young I was exhorted to be “orthodox and loyal to the magisterium and the pope”. The words remain in my memory although the speaker does not.

    “For this scorn it is the object of our devotion to make constant reparation. We must honour the Vicar of Jesus with a loving faith, and with a trustful uncriticising reverence.” Amen.