The Bar is I Assent
I propose a very simple bar that works in practice for collective effort on Catholic Action:
“I assent to all Catholic doctrine.”
This is deceptively simple. Simple as it seems, it solves a number of problems at once that are full blown group destroyers with other possible litmus tests.
“I Assent” Argument 1 – Such a standard eliminates heresy
Heresy is not just for leftists who openly hate the Church. Unfortunately it is alive and well among those who “identify as” traditional Catholic. And indeed they merely “identify as,” because they do not in fact assent to Catholic doctrine.
The most common offenders I see are:
i. False theology of obedience and lay Catholic Action. The motivation usually appears to be cowardice. False theology is sought that allows or even glorifies inaction on scary things.
ii. Right wing modernism. The motivation is idolatry of ideology, paired with a man who strongly “identifies as” Catholic. If only that man wanted to be Catholic so much as he wants to identify as!
These are no less heretical than a “pro abortion Catholic” or “pro sodomy Catholic.” It is equally a contradiction in terms. And yet it tends to be tolerated in circles that identify as traditional Catholic, while other heresies are not. This “pet heresy” standard is itself not in any way Catholic, but pure Catholic in Name.
I have been in “traditional Catholic” groups where such heresy is tolerated. In fact that is the norm in groups that identify as traditional Catholic. Without an explicit standard, “I assent to all Catholic doctrine,” virtually always these “traditional Catholic” groups allow heresy, so long as it’s one of the pet “allowable” heresies like right wing modernism, rather than an “unallowable heresy” like pro abortion. It becomes nonsense to even refer to the group as traditional Catholic. Since “traditional Catholic” is a redundant term, it becomes nonsense to refer to the group as Catholic. That is most groups that identify as traditional Catholic.
Groups should have an explicit rule for membership that requires a member to affirm, “I assent to all Catholic doctrine.”
Does this actually make a difference? In my experience yes. I have seen it make a difference. People are forced to get in line or leave the group.
“I Assent” Argument 2 – This also puts an end to a lot of the papal issue wars
Is Francis the worst Pope ever or not even Pope? The fact is, highly intelligent, honest men who assent to all Catholic doctrine are represented in every “camp,” from conservative Novus Ordo to SSPX to SSPV to sedevacantist. To say otherwise is to speak falsely. Yes, I have very strong opinions on these issues. I can defend those opinions with strong points on theology and canon law. On certain specific points I believe that certain camps are illogical, do not understand fairly basic theology, or are even objectively wrong.
Nonetheless, I would still speak falsely to claim I have not met men in all camps that, as far as I can tell, assent to all Catholic doctrine. I would be calumniating them, using heretic as a power word to defame them instead of using it as a theological term with a specific meaning that is not to be brandied about when not even true.
Certainly these issues are extremely important. Whether a given sacrament is valid can determine whether someone is actually absolved, which will determine in many cases whether they are saved or damned. That’s as important as it gets.
Nonetheless, that level of importance does not imply that everything depends on it. Protestants and Catholics protest abortion together despite Protestants behaving in a way that will in fact damn them. Is it important that they convert? Yes. Does that imply that it is somehow correct to destroy a pro life march to have a Catholic vs Protestant debate? No.
This is not a statement of ecumenism in a modernist indifferentist sense, or a statement that it’s unimportant, or a statement that all camps are equally right and everyone’s opinion is just as good.
The matters are critically important, all camps are certainly not correct because they state contrary things, and so on. But forums already exist to have these important debates. It is not necessary that every single multi camp forum devolves ad infinitum into this one debate. “Let the pro life march be a pro life march not a Catholic Protestant debate.” No one would ever claim that quote is ecumenism, indifferentism, thinking it doesn’t matter if Protestants convert, or any such thing. Then let us see the same behavior in conservative Novus Ordo vs SSPX vs SSPV vs sedevacantist.
How, in practice, is that possible? It’s simple:
The bar is I assent. “I assent to all Catholic doctrine.”
This litmus test is extremely decisive in practice. It tells who is fighting for The Social Reign of Christ The King. I can fight for pro life with a Protestant, but I could not fight for a Catholic state with him. After all, he doesn’t want that. So with whom can I fight for The Social Reign of Christ The King? That is simple:
Those who assent to all Catholic doctrine.
If, on even one point, they dissent from Catholic doctrine, then yes I might be able to work with them the same general way I do a Protestant, but I could not specifically fight for The Social Reign of Christ The King with them, since they have shown they do not want it. They just want the part they like.
But suppose someone assents to all Catholic doctrine. Then yes that man wants The Social Reign of Christ The King just as I do, because that itself is part of Catholic doctrine, as taught especially in the social Papal encyclicals of Leo XIII through Pius XII and as expounded by the great Father Denis Fahey. “Does it matter” if he disagrees on what’s a valid mass or absolution? Yes of course it matters in terms of our eternal salvation. And that is why forums should and do exist for this critically important debate, that believe me I too have very strong feelings on.
But “does it matter” in the sense that I can not fight for The Social Reign of Christ The King with him if we disagree?
No. As long as he assents to all Catholic doctrine and so do I, then we know that we are fighting for the same thing.
Catholic history does speak to this, in the form of the Arian crisis vs the Western Schism. The Arians were absolutely not regarded as Catholic by the actual Catholics, even if they held some title such as Bishop. Why? Because they did not assent to Catholic doctrine. It would make no sense whatsoever for Catholics of that era to fight with Arians to take back the Church, because Arianism was the very thing that must be fought. In an anti-Pope controversy, however, no matter how deeply each side felt that it was right, nonetheless it made perfect sense for both sides to work together on various Catholic initiatives, including resolving the crisis. Why? Because both sides assented to all Catholic doctrine. There was no disagreement on wanting The Social Reign of Christ The King and a functioning papacy restored. The only disagreement was on what Catholic theology meant in a confusing situation, not whether to assent to Catholic doctrine in the first place.
The bar is I assent.