To kneel or not to kneel; to receive in the hand or on the tongue; to attend the EF Mass only or have the OF Mass in Latin; to have a vernacular EF Mass or not; to wear a chapel veil or not; these and much more are the questions!
In comments on other posts, some feel very strongly about kneeling for Holy Communion and are quite willing to do so on the hard floor to make their point. They encourage others of a like mind to do so.
I have heard of pastors who have removed kneelers from their churches so that people are forced to stand for the Eucharistic prayer. In some places people stand even after receiving Holy Communion until the last person has received. EWTN at one time provided portable kneelers to people whose churches had none.
The Society of Saint Pius X which is a break away group of Catholics who have their own illicitly consecrated bishops came about as a direct result of dissent from all or at least most of the documents of Vatican II especially the reform of the Mass after Vatican II. This group brought public dissent amongst the laity and clergy to a new high in the post-Vatican II Church, similar to those who dissent from Humanae Vitae, but have found no bishops to lead their schism.
Praytell is a blog that encourages academic debate about liturgy and other things in the Church, such as authority, secrecy, and dissent. Its editors never call caustic liberal commenters who try to humiliate others who disagree with them on the carpet but constantly strike out at the more conservative comments thus painting conservatives as mean people and liberals as victims when in reality both groups are rather caustic and mean spirited. There is also an academic and condescending attitude taken with those who disagree with some posts and comments. It really is the academic equivalent to "clericalism."
Praytell's primary ethos has been to denigrate the new English translation of the Mass as a botched worked that neglected the advice of scholars and others in the know and was revised in Rome after the 2008 translation was approved thus making the 2010 translation somewhat different than that which was submitted to Rome and had even received papal approval. These people are not happy campers. They are as mad as hell and they aren't going to take it anymore! Liberals like to stay in the Church to create more division and wreak more havoc whereas conservatives usually strike out on their own since they are more unified and can find unified leadership.
PRAYTELL now reports dissent from a liberal clique of rebellious Irish priests who are asking the bishops to shelve the whole implementation of the new English translation for another five years until the Irish can come up with their own better version, reflective of Irish values and culture. Keep in mind that it is quite common for Sunday Mass in Ireland not to be sung and to be finished in 12 to 15 minutes. The liturgical heritage of the Church which the Church of England preserved and the Irish Catholics did not because Catholicism was outlawed and Catholics could not worship out loud and in large numbers, make the Catholic Mass of Ireland a Mass on the run done quickly and quietly so no one was killed. High Church, meaning Catholic Liturgical heritage, is considered too Protestant, i.e. Church of England, because the Church of England took over all the beautiful churches and cathedrals of Ireland and could worship out loud and in beauty. How unfortunate for the Catholic Church of Ireland today to associate our high church traditions with Protestantism.
One wonders if those who side with the more liberal and mean-spirited side of Praytell won't create their own schism similar to the Saint Pius X Society. Although liberals are so all over the place they are incapable of a unified approach to anything because their premise is dissent. A unified liberal approach is an oxymoron in other words. Division and dissent are what liberalism in the Church is all about.
So with all the liturgical divisiveness today, what's a pastor to do? What's a congregation to do? Personally I believe it will cause more people to become more apathetic about their faith, clergy and laity included. Who wants even more grief added to their complicated lives. Shouldn't the Church prepare people for heaven, comfort the afflicted and challenge the comfortable to be more Christ-like. Don't we win people over to Christ with honey rather than vinegar? Should not the Mass in the Latin Rite be universal, peaceful, and a experience of God's grace, peace and unity?
No one wants to be a part of a family that is always bickering. They fall apart, spouses divorce, children go between parents. Do we need that in the Catholic Church?
A unified Roman Catholic Church would go a long way in presenting the world the Gospel of Christ. The only one that can truly unify such a diverse group of people as Catholics are is the Holy Father, the pope. But respect for him in matters fallible and infallible as well as in matters of canon law have to be at the basis of this unity. Sacrificing one's own principles and perspective on Church matters for the greater good and the common good of the Church is necessary. That takes humility which unfortunately is in short supply in many quarters of the Church today, both conservative and liberal and in between.
19 comments:
When an academic says on a blog says, "You may not be aware of this or that patristic text, this or that liturgical norm, this or that historical fact," that academic not practicing "academic clericalism."
It is not "condescending" to point out the ignorance of another person, but a Spiritual Work of Mercy. "Instruct the Ignorant"
When I attneded college my teachers rightly assumed that I was ignorant of many, many things. Thank God they did, because this assumption gave me the opportunity to learn.
Good points all G Igitur, however, a blog is not an academic classroom setting. There are a wide variety of people responding and no one really knows anyone's academic credentials. Now if the blog is closed to those with no academic credentials or distinctions of class are made in identifying those who comment (i.e. grade completed, degrees attained, experience in the real world of the Church, etc then when negative or caustic condescending things are written, one knows that it is a teacher to student relationship and not the egalitarianism that liberals tout so much.
Shouldn't the people who makes these decisions be more concerned about what will be pleasing to God instead of what will be pleasing to the people?
I don't think there's anything inherently traditional or liberal about that idea. They should simply look at the Mass and determine how to make it most pleasing to God.
I would argue that some things are of no consequence when viewed from that perspective. For example, I doubt God is all that concerned about whether the Mass is in Latin or the vernacular. However, to be pleasing to God, we should be sure that the language used is of a caliber that is the best we can offer, since that is what we as individuals and as a Church should always be presenting to God in the first place.
Some things are perhaps more important when viewed from that perspective: for example, our posture and behavior during Mass and the relationship between the priest and the people.
Maybe phrased differently, we could ask ourselves (to borrow from both John F. Kennedy and the Baltimore Catechism): let's not ask how God can know, love, and serve us in the liturgy, let's ask how we can know, love, and serve God in the liturgy.
I agree. I quit reading Pray Tell some time ago because of their bias. Seems to me that so much could be rectified in the Church and in the Catholic blogosphere by some definitive teaching document(s). "This is the way it is to be done; now quit arguing about it." Maybe it's time for Vatican III?
Excellent observations about PrayTell, Father. Thanks for your efforts to present a more rational and reasonable viewpoint over there!
It will be interesting to see if the tone changes while the good Fr. Ruff is away for awhile.
Academics are not generally speaking to "the ignorant," rather to others of equal or even superior education who may not be conversant in the academic's particular field. Academics are notorious and obnoxious in such instances for using jargon, technical terms, and glib intellectual put-downs in order to maintain their imagined superiority. Even an academic should be able to, without condescension or smug tongue-in-cheek, discuss his subject on an every day basis with normal well-educated people in English everyone can understand. Anything else is arrogance or a radical lack of self-awareness. I don't know many academics that could be accused of a "Spiritual Work of Mercy" unless they teach in a seminary, and most of those are smug and condescending, too. Give me a break!
A person who is "not conversant in the academic's particular field" is ignorant of that academic's field.
Of course an academic in a particular field is going to use the jargon and technical terms of that field. A Catholic apologist attending a debate on "The Role of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Economy of Salvation" darned-well better be prepared to talk about dulia, hyper-dulia, and latria. Is that person being obnoxious or condescending? Hardly.
Should a cardiologist describe the flow of blood around the heart using terms like "little tubes and tiny pipes," or should she not go ahead and, charges of elitism be damned, actually use the proper terms for the blood vessels?
No, give ME a break!
In an academic debate, the field is limited to those invited, not all have the podium. In a blog, you have a more catholic (little c) group responding, thus Christianity charity demands that there be no condescension towards does who are allowed to make comments. The blog moderator would do well to delete any comments that might be embarrassing to the blog's academic intent, rather that calling the commentor out publicly on the blog itself.
Well, Ignotus/Igitur, Why can the apologist not simply distinguish honor given to men, honor given to God alone, and veneration of the Blessed Virgin for the benefit of the average Catholic...hmmmm?
Your condescension continues to amaze me. Fr. will not allow me to use the highly technical terms it would take to fully address you...LOL!
It takes a greater command of a knowledge set to explain it to an ignorant person and inculcate them than to simply use the person's ignorance against them in order to establish a hierarchy that benefits the knowledgeable.
The essence of leadership is conveying the vision of the objective to the followers along with a sufficient understanding of the praxis that the followers can act appropriately toward that goal without permanent oversight.
The complaint is that many have used lax and incomplete understanding of Vatican II to creatively interpret doctrine that has not changed or control behaviour that is actually optional. They have used position and credentialism to support their position rather either reason or doctrine. The criticism is that it appears some have done this to further personal objectives rather than those of the Church or God.
rcg
RCG you are correct. Vatican II was a pastoral council that initiated a change in attitude and some discipline. The core doctrines and dogmas of the Church were not changed. Vatican II developed the role of the laity or all of the baptized in the Church and that their primary role was in the secular world and they could assist the Church with the more secular aspects of being church, administration, money etc. They were called to witness to the Gospel in the world, to assist the poor, work for justice and bring the Catholic faith to their politics and to government. However, those who interpreted Vatican II developed a clericlized laity working in lay ministries funded by the Church and declericalized the priesthood and diminished the role of the priest.
The Holy Spirit of course is working through all of this anarchy and will pull things back together. We see that with Pope Benedict's reform within continuity and his continuation of what John Paul II began in terms of defining the roles of laity and clergy and creating identities within that context.
Vatican II also shifted how the Church works with the world, other Christian bodies and non Christian religions. We do so now in dialogue rather than in anathamas or fear of the world. That's a good thing for the most part unless it waters down our own Catholic faith or promotes a false egalitarianism or universalism in terms of salvation.
A Southern Baptist was shipwrecked alone on an island. Finally, after years of solitude, a rescue party finds him. The rescuers noticed three well-constructed log huts on the island and asked him their purpose. He responded: "Well, I had to have shelter, so the first hut is my house. Then, I wanted to praise God for allowing me to survive, so the next hut is my Island Baptist Church."
The rescuers asked, "Well, what is the third hut?"
The man replied, "Well, sadly, it wasn't long before there was a split in the church...."
Pinanv - I will use the traditional terminology; to wit, dulia, hyper-dulia, and latria. You can water down the faith and its expression if you want, but the "jargon" is what the Church uses.
Or are you adopting the Trautman Stance, suggesting Catholics (and other) are inable to appreciate the ineffable truths of our faith? Hmmm?
Of course I will explain their meaning, but for the sake of not sounding "condescending" I will not re-write our theological terminology for the sake of avoiding "condescension."
To state things in English rather than Latin is not "watering down the Faith." Or...are you saying that the OF Mass you so vehemently defend is "watering down the Faith?" LOL!
I really like learing Catholic jargon.
As a matter of fact, it deepens my faith.
Wow, I just paid a visit to Pray Tell after avoiding it for a couple of months. It seems that they are getting more hysterical by the day. It is all drama queens writing about how other drama queens are having such a difficult time accepting the new translation. I think if they just try to stay out of the way and let the implementation happen everything will be okay. But that isn't what drama queens do is it?
Fatti maschii, parole femine
rcg
In nuce...
If dissent and heresy were properly and promptly handled from the Vatican on down, the Catholic Church would, by virtual of internal unity, become more attractive to those who are looking at the four marks of the Church, particularly “One.”. Much work and ink has been dedicated to ecumenism as it pertains to the Christians separated from the Church, but perhaps we should work more on efficiently and effectively achieving unity within the Catholic Church.
Protestants must surely wonder why they should become Catholic, when there are so many protestant individuals and protestant groups within the Catholic Church who perpetuate disunity and blatant heresy, with no discipline (forceful teaching) to correct them. . We deny Holy Communion to Protestants in part because the Eucharist is a sign of unity, while at the same time Bishops, Priests and extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist disobey Canon #915 and distribute Holy Communion to self-excommunicated Catholics who persist in manifest heresy. There's something terribly wrong with that picture.
God is love and God is truth. It is a violation of both truth and love to allow blatant heterodoxy/heresy to flourish in the church, politics, healthcare and “Catholic” academia. That violation is seriously sinful.
Post a Comment