Tuesday, June 16, 2015

AN ATOMIC BOMB WENT OFF FOR THE CAUSE OF THE REFORM OF THE REFORM IN CONTINUITY MOVEMENT AND NOT A PEEP FROM LITURGY BLOGS CONCERNED WITH TRADITION ABOUT IT! WHAT'S UP WITH THAT AND HAVE THEY DRUNK THE KOOL-AID OF THOSE WANTING TO SUPPRESS THE ORDINARY FORM ALTOGETHER IN FAVOR OF THE 1962 MISSAL?


I fear the more rational traditional blogs are either still shell-shocked by the election of Pope Francis or they have drunk the Kool-Aid of those promoting only the 1962 Roman Missal. What else accounts for almost no coverage of the bombshell editorial of Cardinal Robert Sarah on jump starting the "reform of the reform in continuity movement" in a way that we had hoped Pope Benedict would do but didn't?  The lack of commentary is mind-blowing!

32 comments:

Vox Cantoris said...

I'm working on it, it's just that there is so much else going on.

Lefebvrian said...

There is an article about this in the latest issue of Angelus magazine.

Traditionalists, almost by definition, aren't advocating for a "reform of the reform," but for a "restoration of Tradition."

There is a post about the Cardinal at Harvesting the Fruit.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

The Harvesting the Fruit blog is schismatic in content if not so in reality. Again, it is this kind of drivel from the far right that has given the mainstream desire to reform the Ordinary Form a bad name by its extremism. It is almost a caricature of a far left progressive feigning to be a traditionalist in order to undermine the whole franchise! We can't take him seriously.

Michael (Quicumque Vult) said...

I agree, the lack of commentary is...interesting. But maybe this is good! Maybe, the CDW can work on this question without too much spotlight, thus stopping possible organized efforts to the contrary from progressive sources...

Angry Augustinian said...

No one trusts that anything Cardinal Sarah talks about will amount to anything before the flood of unbelief and destruction in the Church. I loved reading what he said…like I love reading "Gone With The Wind."

Angry Augustinian said...

Fr. thinks there's a schismatic
Hiding in everyone's attic.
He'll hunt them all down
And, thus, win a crown,
For being so dad gum dramatic.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

I am telling you that wing nuts in the far right of the Church have done more damage to Pope Benedict's legacy and desire than any progressive pope,bishop or lay person. They have shown themselves to be schismatic and neo-Protestants. Everyone with an ounce of Catholicism in their blood sees this and is dismayed and dispirited at what they have done to the sound, orthodox approach to the reform of the reform in continuity. I reiterate, progressives should have feigned to be right wing nuts in the Church long before Pope Francis to undermine the who franchise.

Angry Augustinian said...

Fr, I want some of what you have been drinking...

Angry Augustinian said...

I am not sure how you define far right in the Church. Are you mainly referring to those who want to return to the TLM exclusively? Do you include those who are concerned and disappointed about this Pope? How about those who do not like altar girls and standing to receive in the hand? Those who think Mass should be exclusively ad orientum? What must one do to avoid being called a wing nut? Is saying the Rosary still ok? Do we need to make any changes in the Creed? Most of the people I know that I think you would call wing nuts are simply devout Catholics who honestly believe that Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, is going to return in glory to judge the living and the dead, including the Church? I wonder who He will consider to be wing nuts?

Dialogue said...

I agree with this post and with Fr. McDonald's 3:31pm comment.

Julian Barkin said...

I am with the Good and Holy FR AMJ on this one.

rcg said...

Harden up, Fr. McDonald! The false dilemma is imposed on you by people who want you to defend the nut jobs before acknowledging the validity of the EF. You don't feel compelled to explain the Clown Mass and liturgical dancers before offering one of your orthodox OF ad orientem Masses, do you? Shake it off and let the detractors know that you only are carrying what you need for either group and the tails on either end will need to adjust to you.

CPT Tom said...

You disappoint me Father. I'm not sure what is going on in your neck of the woods but you really are full of vitriol yourself. Catholics can disagree with the Pope on things that are not faith and morales, doctrine, like global climate change, the liturgy, and considering how undisciplined this Pope has been, and antagonistic to traditional orders (eg. FFI), and traditional devotions (ie his comments regarding a rosary crusade for him) it's not surprising some of the "wingnuts" (Wow what a word for a priest to use) are bouncing off of the wall. Those of us who are trying to bridge the gap between OF and EF are getting hammered on both sides. Neo-Catholics? what the heck is that? Maybe people should stop calling each other names and get back to doing the Lord's business. There are some REAL reason for concern among the laity about the Pope charging into the political aspects of the World stage, if the Secular World is cheering then it might not be the right thing to be doing. Calling folks names doesn't help the matter at all.

God's peace be with you.

Militia Immaculata said...

Angry Augustinian (or whatever other online monikers you choose to go by), rather than getting all self-righteous, why don't you swallow your pride and closely and honestly examine yourself and see if your conduct and comments on here are showing a schismatic mentality? If the shoe fits, wear it. If you don't want it to fit, then change yourself so that it won't fit anymore!

John Nolan said...

Fr AJM

Who are these 'right wing nuts' who you claim are doing so much damage? There are extreme sedevacantist groups (some have even elected their own antipope) but their adherents number only a few hundred, they are virtually unknown and the idea that they can do any damage whatsoever is ludicrous in the extreme.

It's about time you started naming names. Who precisely are these schismatic neo-Protestants? Bishop Fellay of the SSPX? The Latin Mass Society of England and Wales who have striven since 1965 for the preservation of the Roman Rite and work closely with the bishops? The international federation Una Voce? The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate? Those priestly fraternities who only use the older books? Michael Voris? The crowd down at EWTN? The monks at Fontgombault, Le Barroux and Norcia, to name but three monasteries who use the older Rite? Liturgical scholars like Alcuin Reid and Uwe Lang? Cardinal Burke?

Or are they just a few splenetic bloggers whose views, however vociferous, are merely personal animadversions? Until you are more specific, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that you are setting up straw men in order to justify what you perceive as a via media.

History will judge Pope Francis. There are some aspects of his pontificate that I would criticize, and I think there were better candidates, but as long as he is pontiff my instincts would lead me to defend him.

Mark said...

Dear Father, is it pretty much a given that the Cardinal's liturgical-related comments the past few weeks signify that His Holiness Pope Francis is ready to enact liturgical reforms?

Pope Francis has said that the Latin Church has lost liturgical reverence. He has exhorted the Latin Church to turn to Eastern Orthodox Divine Liturgy for inspiration in renewing the Mass.

By the way, shouldn't the Latin Church look simply to Her own liturgical Tradition to renew Her liturgy?

Anyway, the liberal/traditional narrative is that Pope Francis detests majestic liturgy. However, from his teenage years to date, Pope Francis has had strong interest in Eastern Catholic/Orthodox Divine Liturgy.

Perhaps Cardinal Sarah's remarks in question signify that Pope Francis is ready to tackle the critical issue of restoring reverence and beauty to the collapsed state of Latin Church Novus Ordo liturgy.

Mark Thomas

Julian Barkin said...

Hello Mark Thomas. Glad to see your input here, outside of Fr D's blog. It Weill be quite level-headed and truly reflecting the Joy of the Gospel, while being Traditonal. Honestly people Mark Thomas's words are worth a read when he posts.

Charles G said...

I don't think casually hurling epithets like "wingnuts" displays a very charitable or respectful disposition, and it politicizes the Church. The Church is above politics, but Father M and Victor and others seem to be trying to criticize people for their political views, which heavily involve prudential matters. I thought all were supposed to be welcome in the Church of Francis? I guess not. That said, if the Pope announces that use of fossil fuels is in and of itself sinful, I would have a huge problem with that. It goes far beyond good stewardship of the environment. And what is with this demonization of businesses as such? Corporations are not evil by their mere existence and often provide great benefit, but should be judged by acts.

Angry Augustinian said...

Militia (or whatever your name is), I recall some pretty pompous posts of your own on this blog. There is nothing self-righteous or schismatic in what I post. I am not calling for separation, schism, or advocating sedevacantism. When did this epithet "schismatic" start getting thrown around, anyway? It is sort of the Vat II crowd's equivalent of "racist," a highly emotive, catch-all term, generally used incorrectly, in an attempt to silence any critic of the Leftist/progressivist cabal or to defend the indefensible semi-coherent ramblings of an ambiguous Pope. Sheesh…didn't I meet you at an FSSP Mass in Mabelton once? Is not your attendance there "schismatic?"

Anonymous said...

Militia Immaculata has never, not once, been "pompous" on this blog. Your ad hominem attack, Gene, is completely unwarranted and reveals the shallowness of your character and the weakness of your arguments.

Flavius Hesychius said...

I don't know, Augustinian... 'schismatic', from my view of things, doesn't seem to be all that bad...

Militia Immaculata said...

Anonymous, thank you.

AA, you've further proven my point. Fr. McDonald and others have called you out numerous times for your vitriol and warned you of its sinfulness -- both in this blog entry and in various others. In response, you've self-righteously attempted to rationalize your behavior and, as Anonymous pointed out, resorted to personal attacks. Remember this little gem you wrote earlier?

Fr. thinks there's a schismatic
Hiding in everyone's attic.
He'll hunt them all down
And, thus, win a crown,
For being so dad gum dramatic.

If you don't see that as a personal attack on Fr. McDonald (not to mention the one on me -- I don't know where you get the idea that my posts are "pompous"), well then, as the saying goes, there is none so blind as one who will not see. And your open, hateful condemnations of Pope Francis (as opposed to occasional honest critiques of this or that aspect of his papacy), combined with your refusal to give him the benefit of the doubt in anything and assuming bad will on his part, is hardly the behavior of one who submits to the Holy Father. No loyal son or daughter would profess love for their father while at the same time openly attacking him. Even so, you're twisting my words -- I never called you schismatic, and you know it. I asked you to examine yourself honestly to see if what you post displays a schismatic mentality. So no, neither my use of the word "schismatic" nor that of Fr. McDonald can possibly be akin to the use of the word "racist" by liberals.

And yes, you met me at that FSSP Mass, but no, my attendance there isn't schismatic because the priests of the FSSP have faculties and actually submit to the Pope; they don't merely pay lip service to him.

One more thing -- you never know who might be reading Fr. McDonald's blog. Did you ever stop to think that your vitriol could very well turn people off to traditional Catholicism, or maybe even Catholicism in general? If, when I first started exploring traditional Catholicism, I had seen or heard the types of things you've repeatedly said on here, I would've completely turned back. Traditional Catholics can be their own worst enemy! So many of them claim they're being persecuted by bishops, priests, and other Catholics, and no doubt that has been the case at times. But in many cases they've brought it on themselves. Back when bishops had to give permission to celebrate the Extraordinary Form Mass, and so few did, many trads assumed said bishops were "modernists" or at least hated the Extraordinary Form. Maybe some did, but then again, maybe some had witnessed the negative attitudes and characteristics among some trads that Fr. McDonald has rightly decried in this blog. At any rate, although you claim that "schismatic" has become a word like "racist," namely, one meant to shut down criticism, I could say the same thing about words like "modernist," "ultramontanist," etc. when used by trads.

Anonymous said...

Father, I think that why people who attend the Extraordinary Form of the Mass aren't interested in the reform of the reform is that we keep getting promised a reform but it never happens. I waited years for the new translation only to find, to my utmost disappointment, the most beautiful part of it - Eucharistic Prayer 1 - is rarely ever said. So to me without that there is very little change.

I stopped going to daily Mass about a year ago because I couldn't bear the ad libbing that goes on and the priest walking all around the church shaking hands, people calling out the prayers of the faithful, etc. The one Mass that followed the rubrics the parents of children allow them to run around the church bang on the glass doors and generally do what they like to the point where it was impossible to hear the words of consecration most days so I gave up. I attend one EF Mass during the week and on Sunday I go to the EF Mass in another city when I can. Otherwise I attend the best OF Sunday Mass. In fact where I am it is regressing and in order to attend Sunday Mass I am going to have to move cities because I am now just beyond all the novelty and guitars and hands raised in the air etc. I am a Catholic not a pentecostal.

I don't think we will see much change for at least 10 years while the 70s hippy lot are still attending Mass. In the meantime those who can are attending the EF Mass where a reform of the reform isn't relevant. Why wait for scraps when the sublime EF Mass is available?

And, yes, Father, I am afraid that the term "Latin Mass nutters" has been used for a long time by the Novus Ordo crowd. It has no effect on me because the nuttiest things I have ever seen have occurred at the Ordinary Form of the Mass and I think those who wish to perservere with it after 50 years have the patience of a saint. I have given up on it. It is up to those who prefer to attend the OF Mass to try and tidy it up but good luck I say. I think we'll still be having this conversation for at least another 10 years!

Jan

Anonymous said...

Militia Immaculata, reading your comment "Angry Augustinian (or whatever other online monikers you choose to go by), rather than getting all self-righteous, why don't you swallow your pride and closely and honestly examine yourself and see if your conduct and comments on here are showing a schismatic mentality?" I am afraid that does sound rather accusatory to me: proud, self-righteous, schismatic.

Also, I don't know if you are aware but anyone who attends the EF of the Mass is labelled a "traditionalist" - therefore that includes yourself if you attend the EF Mass and so any comments Fr McD makes refer also to you because he doesn't make a distinction. Everyone is being labelled because of a few sedavacantists who go over the top and no one takes any notice of them anyway.

It seems to me that those who attend the EF of the Mass are being unfairly labelled and singled out, because they choose this form of the Mass. Perhaps those who are labelling traditionalists need to examine their consciences and see if they themselves are crossing the boundary of charity.

Jan

Angry Augustinian said...

Militia, you need to develop a sense of humor…like, I mean really bad and like right now. Anyway, I have examined my conscience and determined that I do not feel schismatic. In your original post, you called me prideful, self-righteous, and implied that I was schismatic. I guess you get a pass. Oh, and I will happily follow the Pope in matters of faith and doctrine until "pastoral practice" vitiates them, and I do give him the benefit of the doubt…I doubt he is not a Leftist. Have a great day...

Dialogue said...

The study of classical logic and rhetoric greatly benefits discussions of this sort. It is possible--as various parties here insist--to offer criticism in a manner that is both rational and respectful. The present problem emerges when those commenting upon the pope, doctrine, liturgy or works of mercy offer criticisms using dismissive and destructive phrases.

Further, perhaps it would be better to discuss feelings of anger and despair with one's spiritual director, rather than in a public forum such as this blog.

Jacob said...

Father, I think there is no talk on the subject by traditional Catholics because it doesn't affect us. We go to traditional parishes operated by the ICKSP, IBP,FSSP etc etc etc. We don't attend the novus ordo and any changes in the novus ordo wouldn't be noticed by us. In fact there are many of my friends and their children who have never seen a novus ordo mass.

Dialogue said...

Jacob,

The fact that ya'll don't see the OF Mass as a treasured part of our liturgical family is precisely the problem. Terms like "traditional Catholics", "traditional parishes" and "novus ordo" are dismissive and divisive. Pope Benedict liberated the EF rites in order to bring unity to the Roman liturgical tradition, not to encourage attitudes like yours. To top it all off, whenever some goodly priest like Fr. McDonald tries to correct this dismissive trend, folks like you seem surprised to find someone you respect lamenting your un-Catholic behavior. Shame, shame shame.

Lefebvrian said...

Priests who think that the Novus Ordo is a "treasured part of our liturgical family" are the problem. Shame, shame, shame. It is a shame that we have to be called "Traditional Catholics" and drive hours each Sunday to find a "Traditional parish," but that is not our fault -- the fault lies with all the non-Catholics in the Church professing that they are Catholics and the bishops and priests who insist that the Traditional Mass is anathema. We are obliged to distinguish ourselves from them. I separate from them for no other reason that I hope to save my soul and the souls of those under my charge. If they were Catholic, the need for further adjectival descriptors would evaporate, alas that is not yet the case. Thank God for all the Traditional priests who have made a firm decision to uphold the faith instead of being lukewarm and indecisive.

Jacob said...

Lefebvrian you are correct. I couldn't have said it better. I must say after reading what some have said I now know why we have to build the walls around our wonderful traditional parishes and hunker down and let the dark ages pass us by in a century or so. And for the record I appreciate what father mc Donald has and will do for his parishioners. He has to be one of the best priests in his diocese. I had no idea there was so much bigotry prejudice and hate against the traditional catholic movement, since I have no contact with the novous Ordo church. This has opened my eyes.

Militia Immaculata said...

Jan:
If it sounds accusatory to you, it's because you've chosen to wrongly interpret it that way. Fr. McDonald has called him out repeatedly for comments he's made that have been gravely disrespectful to the Holy Father, but he has responded by attempting to rationalize his behavior and denigrate Fr. McDonald. This has gone on for a couple years now; do a search of previous blog entries here!

Does Fr. McDonald really fail to make a distinction between extreme traditionalists and, for lack of a better phrase, non-extreme traditionalists? I highly doubt that. He's intelligent enough to know that there are LOTS of non-extreme traditionalists out there. Are there those who unfairly label and single out EF attendees? Surely there are. But traditionalists aren't exactly pure as the driven snow in this matter either. There's lots of self-examination to be done on both sides; lack of charity isn't unique to one side or the other.

AA:
Just because one doesn't feel schismatic doesn't mean one isn't. And no, I am not calling you schismatic, nor have I ever done so. I asked you to examine yourself to see if your words indicated a schismatic mentality. Period. Nor did I call you prideful or self-righteous; I told you to swallow your pride and to stop acting self-righteous in this instance and accept fraternal correction when called out (like now).

Furthermore, the Pope has not vitiated faith and morals via pastoral practice (no matter how much you claim otherwise). As for your last statement, remember what I said earlier about rash judgment and suspicion being sinful -- even mortally sinful? You say I need to develop a sense of humor, but mortal sin is no laughing matter! It's hardly charitable to remain silent when we see folks gravely endangering their souls.

Angry Augustinian said...

Militia, I did not say the pope had vitiated faith and morals…I expressed the concern that "pastoral practice" would be used as a de facto way of ignoring and, in effect, changing doctrine. "Praxis" is a favorite term of the Liberation theologians.