CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS: Traditionalism at Sixty (Trad Godfathers, pt. I)

Are you a veteran of the Trad movement? If so, One Peter Five would appreciate your memories. 

From One Peter Five

By Timothy Flanders, MA

Trad Godfathers: a New Conversation
Part I: Traditionalism at Sixty
Part II: What are the Non-Negotiables of the Trad Movement?
Part II: Who are the Clans of Tradition?

Part I: Traditionalism at Sixty

Editor’s note: this article is occasioned by the recent critique of the Trad movement we published by Fr. Michael Brownson. I have already conceded Fr. Brownson’s primary criticism, as I understand it, using the term “Neo-Jansenism” in this article on the Dubia of Vatican One. I have further responded to Fr. Brownson here and he has responded to me here. In this further response I will attempt to broaden that conversation to a more general reflection on the past sixty years of Traditionalism and invite all readers to submit a response as they see fit. Please note: the following article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or OnePeterFive, but reflects my personal views on the Trad movement, and as a result contrary views to my own are welcome and will be published if they meet our editorial standards. If you would like to respond to this conversation, please send a submission to our new submission email: onepeterfivesubmissions@gmail.com. -TSF

“He’s not a real Trad because I heard him say ___.”

“The Trads promote schism.”

“Then I came to Tradition and my life has never been the same.”

“Unite the Clans.”

These are all vernacular phrases that Catholics say which need a little clarification. The first two are dangerous because they lack truth (=are ambiguous) and charity (=assuming the best about doubtful intentions).[1] The last two are ambiguous but harmless. In fact, the last one is a phrase coined by Mr. Michael Matt, Trad godfather among these States, and forms the basis for our editorial stance. This article will attempt provide a little clarification.

And after three years have passed since our editorial stance and the formation of our editorial board, and after we have begun to vigorously investigate our editorial priorities, founded our lay sodalities (crusade, icon, fast) and our Confraternity under our patrons, gone on pilgrimage to consecrate our apostolate to our patrons as well as to Sr. Wilhelmina…

…and as the Francis Pontificate is reaching its twilight this year, the sixtieth anniversary of the closing of Vatican II– it is an auscipicious time to reflect on the mission of OnePeterFive and its place within the greater Trad movement. To do that, I’m going to attempt to define in this article what are essential “non-negotiables” of the Trad movement, which helps us understand who are the “clans” of the Trad movement to unite.

Historical Context of “Unite the Clans”

Our editorial stance tries to summarise some of the history of our movement, and it makes mention of a critical focus we’ve tried to achieve here at OnePeterFive: filial piety to our Trad godfathers. This has become critically important because many young people have joined the movement under Summorum and found themselves struggling after Traditionis. Meanwhile, the “old guard” of the movement has faced Traditionis with a smile, knowing what it was like in the 70s and 80s for the Latin Mass (see Mrs. Danielle Heckenkamp, “Cradle Trad Catholic: We Have Every Reason to Hope”).

But more than that, the internet has a problem with promoting serotonin rewards by means of shallow thinking. In other words, the internet is, ironically, designed to obscure the truth. Whoever has the most emotional and sensational words – whatever is “trending” – is what dominates the world wide wibe. What is “trending” is usually what is literally half true and half false.

More or less.

Unless we’re talking about absolute, black and white truths like “Jesus is King,” most of the things said by Catholics in sound bites and memes lacks the precision necessary to tackle most topics (especially in an unprecedented doctrinal, spiritual, political, social and economic crisis as we have seen with what Sr. Lucia called “diabolical disorientation”).

So that’s where our online journal is trying to step in and provide something for free to everyone where we can really dig deep and find the whole truth, not a slogan. When we speak of the history of the Trad movement, and espcially its various “clans,” there’s no room for an easy, catchy meme to describe the reality of what we’re talking about. Just like most Ecumenical Councils and their aftermaths, this Council has had its share of total chaos after the event. In some ways it’s worse than most Ecumenical Councils, and in some ways it’s better (no Christians murdering each other, for instance). But like every Ecumenical Council, both historically and doctrinally – it’s anything but simple and “meme-able.”

What does this have to do with the godfathers of Tradition? Here’s how our editorial priorities puts it: we want to publish

4. Stories of our Trad Godfathers: The Coetus, Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, the Hildebrands, Lefebvre, Senior, Oliveira, Görres, and more. Along with our patrons, we want to promote the zeal of our Trad godfathers in the movement. A new generation of traditionalists is rising, but they need to be connected with their own Trad godfathers who came before them and were fighting the good fight since 1962 and before. They faced darker times than we do now. How did they get through it? What did they do? What were their successes and failures? What is the wisdom they can pass down to us? Recent historical studies by Chiron and Porfiri are of note here.

The thing about our Trad godfathers is that their intellects were not stunted by the internet. They produced articles, books, lectures, and met in person to promote their views. This led, among themselves, to a real intellectual dialogue and scholastic-style debate among brothers, like the Hildebrands’ Roman Forum. In other words, there was an organic uniting of the clans in a charitable intellectual exchange because they were 1.) traditional and 2.) not hindered intellectually by the technocracy we face.

Moreover, having a traditionally Catholic weltanschauung, theyunderstood that their movement was brand new – it really “happened yesterday” in terms of the history of the Church. Therefore there was bound to be disagreements – even vehement disagreements – but it would not be traditional to absolutise my opinion over yours, in a movement in the history of the Church that just began “yesterday.”

Our Trad godfathers understood that the unprecedented Iconoclasm occasioned by Vatican II was scattering all good and faithful Catholics, and the traditionalists were all in a war on the same side. In war, there are bound to be differences of opinion when planning the defence and counter-attack. Our fathers saw the bigger picture of the eventual triumph of Tradition. They understood who were the true enemies: not fellow Trads (not even non-Trad, yet faithful Catholics), but the Neo-Modernist Iconoclasts who sought to destroy the Latin Mass.

The enemy would quickly snuff out the Trad movement if one Trad soldier began a bitter fight with another Trad soldier about when, how, and by what means they would attack the enemy. Our Trad godfathers were cunning warriors. Their heroes were the Crusaders, the Vendéeans, and the Cristeros. They understood that if the enemy could divide the Trads into infighting, the movement would quickly be destroyed.

They were facing persecution everywhere in almost every diocese, so it was easy for them, when they met, to be united with each other, despite varying degrees of disagreement. This is the historical framework of “unite the clans.” It’s not suprising that a layman like Mr. Michael Matt came up with this concept. The Matt family has been fighting for the Faith for generations even before the Second Vatican Council. But Mr. Matt also experienced the pain of Catholic division in his own family so he has the magnanimity to see the broader picture and not get sucked into “internet thinking” where Christians hurls stones at each other, to their eternal damnation.

[1] As St. Thomas states, “unless we have evident indications of a person’s wickedness, we ought to deem him good, by interpreting for the best whatever is doubtful about him.” ST II-II q60 a4. Emphasis mine