The Divisions in the Church (Part I: Amongst Active, Practising Catholics)

I want to write about something that has been on my mind for a long time, namely the different divisions within the Church in Ireland and what difficulties these present. I am going to try and look at a variety of types of division. This post is going to be largely based on personal observations and so to a degree is anecdotal, so alternative views would be welcome.

This is the first post of three on the issue of divisions within the Church, more to come shortly.

Four Camps

Amongst those who are both practising Catholics (defined as those who attend Sunday Mass regularly) and active Catholics (defined as those who are involved in Church groups on account of their faith, whether this means parishes, apostolates, movements or charities) I have noticed several broad divisions.

I have attempted to sketch some outlines of these divisions and for convenience’s sake I have divided them into four rough ‘camps’ of active, practising Catholics, outlined in the diagram below.

 

Diagram 1: The Four Camps

Some important caveats: these are not four fixed points but rather a spectrum. Each person is an individual, unique and thus occupying a different place within the four points of the diagram, if indeed they even fit within it. It is not my wish to pigeonhole every Catholic in Ireland but rather to identify certain trends and divisions within our Church. My descriptions of these camps will be broad caricatures.

In attempting to identify strengths and weaknesses in each camp, I am not trying to tar anyone with a particular negative reputation or imply that certain strengths belong only in one place, but rather give some general tendencies I have observed.

So what exactly are these four camps? I shall start with the two easier ones to define.

Traditionalists and Liberals

These terms should be obvious in their meaning to anyone involved in the Catholic Church, but I will sketch them out a bit here.

Traditionalists are those who are attached to the older forms of worship, particularly the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, or the Traditional Latin Mass as it is also called. This covers quit a broad spectrum, from those who attend both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms, to those who only attend the Extraordinary Form when given the choice, to those most extreme who will not attend the Ordinary Form even if this is the only Mass available on a given Sunday. This latter group includes many who have left the Church for groups such as the quasi-schismatic SSPX and various smaller sedevacantist groupings.

Traditionalists are the driving force behind a variety of groups, such as the Latin Mass Society of Ireland and the St. Conleth’s Heritage Association as well as religious fraternities like the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest (ICKSP) and the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP). There are some who lean towards PLC and others towards YD in terms of pro-life activism. They tend to come from a higher socio-economic bracket and be well-educated. The more moderate would read The Brandsma Review, the more extreme Christian Order.

Traditionalists’ strengths lie in their dedication to beautiful liturgy, their desire to preserve the liturgical, architectural and historical heritage of the Church which has often been tossed aside carelessly in the aftermath of Vatican II. It is thanks to traditionalists that the older rite is still practised.

Their weaknesses lie in tendencies towards rigidity and in some cases a strong tendency to romanticise the past, especially the monarchies of Europe, and to run after conspiracy theories. In some cases they are overly critical of Vatican II, to the point of rejecting it outright in the case of the SSPX and sedevacantists.

Liberals, on the other hand, are those who have embraced a particular definition of Vatican II known as ‘the spirit of Vatican II.’ They are almost always in disagreement with a large portion of Church teaching, especially in the area of sexuality, although many would draw the line at abortion. Liberal Catholics in Ireland are probably best known through the Association of Catholic Priests and the various leadership figures of that group who have been silenced by the Vatican (NB: ‘silencing’ is a process whereby the liberal priest is censured by the Vatican for their heterodox views, with the result that they gain regular newspaper columns and television appearances). Many older religious orders would largely fall into this category, such as the Redemptorists and Jesuits, albeit with exceptions. Younger liberal Catholics would have tended to be involved with groups such as Magis. They have been the driving force behind the liturgical reforms post Vatican II, which alas have included the destruction of many beautiful churches, which traditionalists refer to as ‘wreckovation.’ Irish seminaries have long been dominated by liberals who are reputed to be holding back what they refer to as seminarians who are ‘too conservative.’ Although there are young liberals in the Church, this group in particular is dominated by the old, at least going by some of the more liberal conferences that have been held, and the factors of age and a sense of having lost the battle for the Church after the pontificates of St. John Paul and Pope Emeritus Benedict have often embittered them towards the other groupings. They read the Tablet and similar publications.

Their strengths lie in their great desire to help the poor and downtrodden, often putting more orthodox Catholics to shame by their work with the homeless, drug addicts and asylum seekers, perhaps a case of liturgical innovators entering the kingdom of heaven before the rest of us.

As mentioned above, their weaknesses are a disregard for orthodoxy which often extends to a stubborn refusal to consider the arguments for orthodoxy and is often coupled with a strong tendency to go with the flow of the world.

Camp A and Camp B

Now we come to another split along a different axis. The names I have chosen, you will notice, are entirely nondescript, as I could not come up with terms to describe these groupings of Catholics satisfactorily. Nonetheless I must try to describe them. Again, these are broad trends I have observed, common strands that tend to tie these amorphous groupings together.

Camp A describes those who tend towards more a more charismatic spirituality (I toyed with calling this grouping ‘charismatic’ but the label would be a bit too narrow). Their spirituality is often very devotional. They are generally the first to be attracted to new visionaries or private revelations. If they haven’t been Catholic all their lives, then they probably became Catholic because of Medjugorge or because of somebody who is into Medjugorge. They tend to be the backbone of prayer meetings and adoration teams around the country. In terms of pro-life work, they tend to gravitate towards Youth Defence, HLI and Precious Life. A substantial proportion of them are working class or lower middle class, though not all. A lot of Camp A people would be involved in movements like the Legion of Mary, the Marian Movement, the Elijah Fellowship or the Emmanuel Community to name a few. Their paper of choice would be Alive! or the Catholic Voice (although the latter would have some crossover with some traditionalists). Camp A tends to be highly Eurosceptic.

If they have strengths as a group, they are the great zeal for evangelisation they bring to the Church, their desire to share the Gospel courageously and their steadfast dedication to the Church and perseverance in prayer that lasts for years.

If they have weaknesses as a group, it is a tendency to be credulous regarding dubious private revelations and charismatic leaders (in the human sense); there is also a tendency towards a form of quietism (that is to say an attitude of praying about the problems in the Church and society without doing anything).

Camp B, which I considered calling ‘Thomistic’ (although again this proved too narrow for what I wished to convey) tend towards a more intellectual approach to the faith (I make this as a neutral rather than a positive remark), sometimes with a more Ignatian spirituality. Their faith is often very focused on philosophy, theology and apologetics. They are often involved in movements in the Church such as Communion and Liberation, Regnum Christi and Sant’Egidio; some would be members of Opus Dei. They work with groups such as Catholic Comment and would be the strongest supporters of the Iona Institute. In terms of pro-life work, they gravitate towards PLC or Family and Life. They read The Irish Catholic or Position Papers. A substantial proportion of them come from a higher socio-economic bracket, though not all. Camp B tends to support the EU, although often with reservations.

If they have strengths, they are a prudent, considered approach towards private revelations, evangelisation and apologetics, a pragmatic, professional approach towards apostolate and a desire to grapple with the great intellectual tradition of the faith.

If they have weaknesses, they are a desire for respectability in the eyes of the world that can lead to being afraid to be open about their faith or even in some cases compromise with the world and a spiritual pride that comes from placing learning of the faith on a pedestal.

As I said, these categories are not firm and there is much crossover. Plenty of people in Camp A and Camp B attend the Traditional Latin Mass; plenty more are into liturgical innovation. Plenty of people in Camp B incorporate private revelations such as Medjugorge or other traditional devotions into their spirituality. And then there are always going to be those strange outliers such as the gay marriage advocates who attend the Extraordinary Form.

These categories are rather loose collections of threads that tend to bind certain people together into different Catholic ‘Camps.’

Divisions

This is interesting in and of itself, but I’m not simply raising the issue for taxonomy’s sake. I bring it up because from what I observe these differences tend to divide us. Rather than seeing ourselves as one Church and many people trying to work together to build Christ’s Kingdom in the world, we tend to see only the differences.

Of course, there is the issue that some within these groups, particularly those within the liberal camp but also others (such as the extreme end of the traditionalists) are in outright disagreement with Church teaching, which is divisive in and of itself.

But more than that, there is a tendency to lay into each other over our differences. There is a tendency to treat disagreements that are purely prudential as though they are inviolable doctrine and an unwillingness to see beyond these disagreements and try to come to a compromise.

I believe that one element of this is that the lack of leadership from our bishops has often meant that a variety of charismatic individuals have stepped up as leaders within the Church, often with the belief that what they decide is right, often justified either through a sense of intellectual or spiritual pride, or a mistaken idea of discernment which says that if you pray about something then whatever you do is blessed and anyone who disagrees can’t be following God’s will.

I’m speaking in generalities here, so I’ll take two concrete examples, focusing particularly on the divide between the A and B camps.

One of the most obvious examples is the split in the pro-life movement here. Now, this issue is of concern to more than just the Catholic Church, but given that Ireland is predominantly Catholic so too is the pro-life movement, and committed pro-lifers tend to be committed Catholics. As I said before, Camp A tends to side with Youth Defence, HLI and Precious Life, whereas Camp B tends to side with PLC and Family and Life.

To take a specific flashpoint, there was a debate before the abortion legislation went through in 2013 between members of Camp A and Camp B over whether or not demonstrations should include prayer. Camp A argued that we shouldn’t be afraid of our Catholic faith or hide it, and furthermore some in this camp argued that the threat of abortion was so imminent that only public prayer could stop it (there is the quietism). Camp B argued that in order to convince members of the public to take the issue seriously, pro-life events should be primarily non-denominational so as to attract a wide base and show that there are reasons to be pro-life that Catholics and non-Catholics can agree on.

Subsequently a prominent member of one of the Camp A pro-life groups went on record in one of the Catholic newspapers after the bill was passed by the government, specifically condemning the Camp B pro-life groups for bringing in abortion, because they refused to pray at their events, which meant that they had abandoned God and He has consequently punished Ireland with abortion.

Now, never mind that most of the people in these particular groups are devout practicing Catholics, who don’t particularly hide their faith and who in fact helped to organise a massive prayer vigil in Knock.

This was a classic case of a member of one camp condemning the others for a tactical issue that was purely prudential. Nowhere in the Bible or the Catechism does it say that public prayer is dogmatically essential at a public political rally. In fact, you can find words spoken by Jesus that could be interpreted to mean the opposite. But this particular charismatic leader (who I might add HAS done good work for the pro-life cause, and is to be commended for it) decided to turn the other side into a scapegoat for an issue that is actually the result of losing a much, much broader cultural battle over an issue that is entirely prudential.

That said, some in Camp B argued that there shouldn’t be any public prayer at these kind of events whatsoever, which I felt indicative of the aforementioned desire for respectability in the eyes of the world. No doubt these same people think very highly of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King without realising the irony.

A second concrete example would be the different attitudes towards the EU; there are some in Camp A who want to leave the EU altogether, and this becomes intertwined with nationalism, whereas some in Camp B can go to the opposite end and blindly follow Europe. Catholic-sounding arguments are often used to justify these positions, such as ‘integrating into the EU will bring in abortion, therefore it is an intrinsic evil.’ Given that various EU treaties have not dealt explicitly with abortion, this is a bit of a misleading statement. The only legalisation of abortion in Ireland happened through the actions of the Supreme Court and our elected representatives in the Dáil.

One particularly egregious example of this was when the Irish Catholic took a firm, front-page stance advocating a Yes vote regarding the Lisbon treaty. Now, I think that this was a stupid move that would alienate a lot of Catholics (and, for the record, I was not a Yes voter). The Irish Catholic normally does very good work working for unity between all within the Church and in that instance it was a bit of a let-down.

But churches certain parts of the country actually sent the papers back then, refusing to sell them on the basis that they thought a Yes vote was not just imprudent but immoral. I have heard it said that the Irish Catholic sold out Catholic principles by taking such a stand, and however I feel about the EU I feel that this is making a purely prudential issue into an absolute, with the result that one side anathemises the other.

Abortion and the EU are two examples. There are many other, smaller examples of differences in approach; traditionalists who won’t accept those who attend the Novus Ordo as ‘real Catholics,’ people in other camps who write off all traditionalists as ‘too conservative,’ liberals who refuse to dialogue as they shout about ‘dialogue’ and, indeed, those in the more orthodox camps who refuse to even talk to liberals, ignoring the Church’s call to enlighten those we see on the wrong path.

Unity

So ultimately I think that one of the problems we have within the Church in Ireland is a grave lack of unity. The various different groupings need to learn to listen to and respect one another, to be secure enough in themselves to hash out differences in charity so as to come to the truth. We also need to learn our faith and understand what it really teaches, what can and can’t be disagreed over and still be faithful to the Magisterium.

So often too ego comes in and ruins any chance of cooperation, a risk we all need to watch out for.

We need to understand that we all have different experiences and we all experience God in different ways. Even if there is only One Truth, we are each fragments that reflect that Truth through our own unique subjectivity, each called to serve in a unique way.

If we are going to rebuild the Church in this country we all need to work together. And that means not seeing each other as the enemy, not seeing impassable gulfs where there are only differences in tactics or emphasis. It means building bridges between groupings of Catholics who wouldn’t normally work together.

UPDATE: Some further points on this post here.