Monday, November 5, 2018

IS THE CURRENT CRISIS OF LEADERSHIP BEING USED AS A MEANS TO PROMOTE MORE HETERODOXY IN THE CHURCH UNDER THE BANNER (FELT AND BURLAP) OF REFORM?


Yes, sex abuse occurred in the Church ever since there have been human beings in the Church Jesus founded in order to save sinners, btw!

The pre-Vatican II Church after the Council of Trent was the result of an authentic reform movement of the counter-reformation that resulted in the renewal of the Church on many levels, especially as it regarded religious orders, seminaries, and the clergy. Thus we had a very strict hierarchy to include those who were members of the clergy and religious life. There was a no nonsense theology.

And there were many protocols that the post-Vatican II Church leadership mocked and derided. What are some of these? No particular friendships (why do you think that was???). Custody of the eyes (why do you think that was???). Going out in public in pairs. Curfews. Strict criteria for the acceptance of candidates such as proper affectivity according to gender, no mental illness in one's family, not coming from a "broken home" (why do you think that was?) Yes, this ruled out many people and kept many unsuitable candidates out of the seminary and religious life, some perhaps wo might have been good but the greater good meant sacrificing these. Perhaps those older than me can indicate other rules that clearly were for discipline and order.

All of these reforms of Trent were thrown out the window after Vatican II.

What is needed today is a recovery of the Tridentine Catholic identity. It means what Pope Benedict promoted, not a suppression of Vatican II, but its proper interpretation in continuity with the Council of Trent, not in rupture with it. It also means acknowledging that Vatican II was a pastoral council not a doctrinal or dogmatic council and some of the pastoral suggestions taken to their logical conclusion have weakened Catholic identity, missionary efforts and zeal.

As everyone who reads my blog knows, I support the expansion of the celebration of the EF Mass where it is appreciated. But this Mass is appreciated only by an elite group of Catholics both lay and clergy.

What is needed is the Ordinary Form Mass renewed in continuity with the EF but without tossing out the baby with the bath water. I have reiterated over and over again that the template for the renewal of the OF Mass already exists in the Ordinariate's glorious Divine Worship, the Missal.

There has to be a recovery of Latin and Gregorian Chants in its various forms.

There has to be an allowance of the vernacular for the changing parts of the Mass.

Ad orientem must be recovered!

Kneeling for Holy Communion must be recovered!

As with the EF Mass, better training needs to be recovered for the ancillary ministries of the Mass especially for altar servers.

There needs to be a school of theology and/or training for lectors and extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion and openness to female participation in these ministries where proper training and certification occur with a lay subdeaconate.

As it concerns sex abuse of minors, the biggest scandal isn't the fact that corrupt/sick/compromised clergy abused minors, but that bishops did not act in a way that protected the laity and their children but rather enabled serial molesters to continue in ministry after so-called therapy.

The reform of this mentality is very easy and civil law that incarcerates bishops who do such things would end this corruption almost completely, as well as the arrest, conviction and incarceration of the priests who are sexual abusers. Laicization of bishops, priests and deacons guilty of crimes of commission and cover-up will help as well.

We don't need to remake the Church. Just strengthen the efforts of the Council of Trent when it comes to authentic reform and renewal in the Church of today. Don't go back to Vatican II. It has been a disaster for the Church on many fronts because it allows for an interpretation of Catholicism that in breach with the Coucnil of Trent!

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your buddy, Tee Jay Emm, doesn't like the elite and elitists, so he's going to take exception, even if he never says so here, to your comment, "But this Mass is appreciated only by an elite group of Catholics both lay and clergy.

On May 10, TJM said...
"Paul VI, whom I met when he was Giovanni Baptista Cardinal Montini, was a clueless elitist."

What the heck is a "lay subdeaconate"? Isn't a deacon a member of the clergy? Why are you trying to destroy the identity of ordained Catholic clergy by forcing the l;aity into their ranks?

Or are you hyper-clericalizing the laity, over-emphasizing their roles in the liturgy. laity WANT to be laity, not pseudo-clergy.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

So u are opposed to laity entering religious life and the clergy. You are a fuzzy thinking 60's kind of guy! And yes, some of the greatest and authoritarian forms of clericalism are those laity in full time ministry. So according to your thinking ministry should not be used in their ministry description nor should they be paid.

Anonymous said...

"So u are opposed to laity entering religious life and the clergy."

No, I am surprised at your fuzzy "lay subdeaconate" thinking. First, there's no such thing. Second, you constantly rant about the clericalization of the laity and the laicization of the clergy, suggesting some undefined "loss of priestly identity." Yet, here you are, proposing precisely what you claim to detest.

According to my thinking, those who minister are minsters, whether ordained or not. A minister need not be a cleric.


Mark Thomas said...

Father McDonald said..."As everyone who reads my blog knows, I support the expansion of the celebration of the EF Mass where it is appreciated. But this Mass is appreciated only by an elite group of Catholics both lay and clergy."

Father, you are in line with Pope Benedict XVI's attitude in regard to the EF.

In answer to those who feared the TLM — as well as those who favored the TLM to the point that they believed that Pope Benedict XVI planned to restore the TLM at the Novus Ordo's expense — he made clear the following:

-- Few Catholics, speaking relatively, favor the TLM.

-- The Novus Ordo is here to stay. The Novus Ordo will serve as the Latin Church's primary Mass. Pope Benedict XVI was unrelenting in his support of the Novus Ordo Mass.

Pope Benedict XVI, press conference en route to France:

http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2008/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20080912_francia-interview.html

Q. What do you say to those who, in France, fear that the "Motu proprio' Summorum Pontificum signals a step backwards from the great insights of the Second Vatican Council? How can you reassure them?

Pope Benedict XVI:

"Their fear is unfounded, for this "Motu Proprio' is merely an act of tolerance, with a pastoral aim, for those people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar with it and want to live with this liturgy.

"They form a small group, because this presupposes a schooling in Latin, a training in a certain culture.

"There is no opposition between the liturgy renewed by the Second Vatican Council and this liturgy."
===================================================================================

http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070707_lettera-vescovi.html

LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS ON THE OCCASION OF THE PUBLICATION
OF THE APOSTOLIC LETTER "MOTU PROPRIO" SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM

"The use of the old Missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of the Latin language; neither of these is found very often.

"Already from these concrete presuppositions, it is clearly seen that the new Missal will certainly remain the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, not only on account of the juridical norms, but also because of the actual situation of the communities of the faithful."
=====================================================================================

Father McDonald's approach to the Latin Church's liturgical war is peaceful and sensible.

Offer the TLM to the microscopic amount of Catholics (I am in that group) who desire to worship God via the TLM.

The remaining 99.999 percent of Latin Church Catholics will worship God via the Novus Ordo (or additional Rites).

Everybody wins. Liturgical peace reigns.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

Heck, who would have thought? At Atlanta's Episcopal Cathedral of St. Philip yesterday, at their 4pm requiem Eucharist for All Saints' Sunday (of course, the Sunday after All Saints Day),portions of the Eucharist were sung in Latin, like the Kyrie Elison and Angus Del. Probably more Latin than would have been experienced across the street at Atlanta's Catholic cathedral (the two are diagonally across Peachtree Road from each other). Of course that would not be possible in Savannah as technically the Episcopal Diocese of Georgia (based in Savannah) does not have a cathedral (which is odd---how can you have a church with bishops and yet no cathedral in your diocese?)

Something interesting I noticed during the Eucharist there---the celebrant wore a chasuble (that is not the unusual part), while the priests to either side wore dalmatics (as deacons do). Maybe the concept here was there can only be one celebrant at a time, so the other priests are the "assistants". Was this so in the pre-Vatican 2 church too? The dean (of the cathedral) wore a cope, as he only preached the homily but was not at the altar for the Eucharist. And communion was served at the altar rail (though for those who could not climb the steps to the altar, there were "communion stations" for those who wanted to receive standing or in their wheelchairs.


John Nolan said...

Mark Thomas

Unfortunately your habit of selective quotation has once again led you up the garden path. Benedict went out of his way to appease the French hierarchy but it is obvious from all his liturgical writings that he saw the liberation of the Roman Rite as much more than a prudential concession to those (young or old) who were attached to it.

If only one person in ten thousand (your figures) worships according to the classical Roman Rite, then that makes no difference. Quantitative judgements don't apply.

'The use of the old Missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of the Latin language; neither of these is found very often.'

What a devastating comment on the state of seminary education!

Anonymous said...

Many among the Episcopalian clergy tend to choose vesture that fits their fancy, not necessarily following any traditional use patterns. While we tend to have some regulations about who wears what (pectoral crosses are not uncommon among Episcopalian non-bishop clergy) the Episcopalians don't seem to. And if they do, they are not adhered to.

John Nolan said...

All the 'recoveries' and 'reforms' in the Novus Ordo advocated by Fr McDonald are allowed in the rite, which is a protean beast (and that's putting it mildly!). The most important aspect he doesn't mention, which is the use of the Roman Canon, even in its somewhat mutilated state.

The Solemn OF Mass I attended at the Oxford Oratory on Sunday was admittedly mostly in Latin, but there were hymns at the beginning and end, and the OT lesson was read by a lay person. The Roman Canon was used (this is almost always the case) and Communion is kneeling at the rail. Most received on the tongue; the exception seemed to be ladies of a certain age.

The congregation joined in with the responses, sung and said, Credo III and the Pater Noster. They are of all ages, and choose this particular Mass because of, and not in spite of, the Latin; the Mass setting and Offertory motet were by Tomas Luis de Victoria.

The point needs to be emphasized that these options (including 'ad orientem') have to be taken at parish level. There is no chance that bishops, still less the Pope, will mandate them. I know it is ridiculous and aliturgical that a priest can decide on the spur of the moment which Eucharistic Prayer he will use; but the main weakness of the OF, namely its plethora of options, can be turned to advantage.

But lamenting the state of affairs and doing nothing to ameliorate it is simply a recipe for inertia, and pusillanimous to boot.




Henry said...

"The point needs to be emphasized that these options (including 'ad orientem') have to be taken at parish level. There is no chance that bishops, still less the Pope, will mandate them."

Which is one reason why the OF reform suggested by Fr. McDonald will go nowhere during the lifetime of anyone now living.

Another reason inheres in the question whether any significant number of Catholic-in-name-only pew sitters would ever cotton to an OF Mass reformed along EF lines, when admittedly the vast majority now prefer the currently protestantized OF Mass as is.

TJM said...

Henry,

Thanks to post Vatican Disaster II teaching of the "Faith" most modern Catholics are de facto protestants, and I would include many bishops and priests in that group.

John Nolan said...

Henry

Most parishes have more than one Sunday Mass. Simply provide one in English, with congregational hymns, and use the more traditional options (including Latin and ad orientem)
at another. Call one the 'parish Mass' and the other the 'Sung Mass'. People will then gravitate to one or the other according to preference.

You find that families with young children don't necessarily prefer the simpler version. Children get bored with endless talk and a more solemn celebration appeals to their sense of mystery.