Someone recently commented that it was right for Pope Francis to cancel Pope Benedict’s liturgical genius especially as it concerns the liberation of the TLM Mass from the dungeon of imprisonment after the 1970 Roman Missal replaced it.
The ethos behind this authoritarian move by Pope Francis was that TLM Catholics were backwards, rigid and just plain crazy. Thus it was right to cancel the permission to celebrate the Mass in a form known basically unchanged for 1,500 years.
But I know of no TLM Catholics, clergy or laity, who have acted as poorly at some of the progressive Syro-Malabar Catholics who insist that they be allowed the modern celebration of the Rite facing the Congregation.
Perhaps this liturgy should be canceled too, like the TLM was given the fact that these progressive Catholics are misbehaving in a way that TLM Catholics never have!
The Pillar has more bad news about progressive Catholics in India:
Mass resistance: Syro-Malabar priests defy papal delegate’s deadline
Priests in the Archeparchy of Ernakulam-Angamaly defied an ultimatum from Pope Francis’ special delegate and refused to adopt a new uniform form of the liturgy
9 comments:
This has happened several times throughout Christian history. The Novus Ordo implementation and evolution, Old Believers in Russia and the Syro-Malabars, among other places I'm sure (I don't have time to research fallout from Trent).
To me, the Church brought this upon itself for all the reasons we've kicked around exhaustively on this blog. I don't know there to be a constructive remedy....an ordinariate cannot be the answer every time there's a disagreement, or rebellion. As an Easterner, I don't understand the passion displayed during these rebellions, however, their rite is significantly different from my own so I lack a proper basis for comparison. I do thank my lucky stars that this doesn't effect me one iota.
This rebellious cancer sounds so engrained, so widespread among the clergy and the laity (some of which might have been manipulated into the rebellious form of compliance) that, perhaps FR. AJM, there might be some merit to the suppression you suggest. Something is clearly out of control here and it appears endemic.
And, yes, the TLM'ers never did anything on this level.
Sad situation and yet another rupture, or whatever anyone wants to call it.
If the Church hierarchy had been smart in 1964 they would have maintained a TLM in each parish and permitted the “reform” liturgy to develop. The reform would have likely appealed to very few, the present day numbers of attendees of the Novus Ordo would tend to support this view. Perhsps with the stabilizing influence of the TLM the reform may have been less radical. But at leadt there probably would have been peaceful co-existence like we experienced in the post Summorum Pontificum era until the Roche and his boss declared war and messed things up.
Father McDonald said..."The ethos behind this authoritarian move by Pope Francis was that TLM Catholics were backwards, rigid and just plain crazy. Thus it was right to cancel the permission to celebrate the Mass in a form known basically unchanged for 1,500 years."
The ethos in question is related to the following: Pope Francis declared:
"In line with the initiative of my Venerable Predecessor Benedict XVI to invite the bishops to assess the application of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum three years after its publication, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith carried out a detailed consultation of the bishops in 2020."
"The results have been carefully considered in the light of experience that has matured during these years. At this time, having considered the wishes expressed by the episcopate and having heard the opinion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I now desire, with this Apostolic Letter, to press on ever more in the constant search for ecclesial communion."
=========================================
Father McDonald, to return to your comment above. That Pope Francis had viewed: "TLM Catholics were backwards, rigid and just plain crazy."
If your sweeping statement is valid, despite Pope Francis' supposed view of "TLM Catholics," the fact is that for eight years prior to Traditionis Custodes, he had maintained Summorum Pontificum. He had done so even as leading TLM Catholics have acknowledged that Summorum Pontificum had collapsed years prior to Traditionis Custodes' issuance.
Certain allies of Pope Francis insisted that he should have addressed years ago the dreadful problems that had been linked to the TLM Movement. His Holiness had been too benign to TLM Catholics, according to many observers. Even Bishop Fellay reported that Pope Francis had been under tremendous pressure to have moved, for example, against the SSPX.
Cardinals Burke, Müller, Pell, as well as one bishop after another, had long denounced the SSPX. Nevertheless, via the SSPX, Pope Francis has long treated TLM Catholics in kind fashion. In that regard, he has continued that practice in regard to his kind treatment of the FSSP.
Even in regard to Traditionis Custodes, as I had noted last week, Ed Condon, via his article in The Pillar, noted that TC is not even close to the supposed "cruel," monstrous document that fierce critics of His Holiness have pretended. TC is, as The Pillar article had presented, a rational "reworking" of Summorum Pontificum.
Anyway, the "ethos" in regard to your comment in question is the result of serious concerns that Pope Francis had received from bishops, as well as the then-CDF.
Father McDonald, thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald said..."Thus it was right to cancel the permission to celebrate the Mass in a form known basically unchanged for 1,500 years."
The Church celebrates the TLM.
==============================================
Father McDonald, here is about a 5-minute youtube video of George Weigel having denounced the notion that the TLM is the unchanged "Mass of the Ages."
Should you have time and desire, I am interested please in your response to the following. Thank you, Father McDonald:
-- The Mass of the Ages Myth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJsedgUmYpA&t=75s
For example, at the 2:48 mark, George Weigel declared: "As a matter of historical fact, this image of the Mass of the Ages is a fiction. It's just not true."
During the video, George Weigel stated that pre-Vatican II parish Masses were rushed, as well as featured dreadful attempts to pronounce Latin, and offered very dreadful music.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
More lies from MT. LOL
Another Reality Check for MT:
"The Francis Effect™. During Cardinal Bergoglio’s tenure as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, the archdiocese’s ordinations dropped by more than 50%. So inspiring!
Sadly, few in Church leadership would likely diagnose the problem correctly. Rather, their proposed solution will be to triple-down on liberalism! No matter that liberalism has failed in every religion in which it’s been tried, always and everywhere. No worries, it’s what the public says it wants, so it’ll have to work eventually if we just reach peak liberalism, right?"
Three months ago, Gregory Dipippo, via his New Liturgical Movement article, rejected one claim after another that George Weigel had offered in the short video in question.
-- Historical Falsehoods about the Liturgy from George Weigel
https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2023/05/historical-falsehoods-about-liturgy.html
However, George Weigel has not backed down in regard to his claims in question.
Anyway, I had wondered as to whether Father McDonald had wished to comment upon George Weigel's comments in regard to the TLM, which Mr. Weigel has insisted is not the unchanged "Mass of the Ages."
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
TJM, all we need is MORE COW BELL!!!, that'll fix it, MAN!
Just think if Catholics had reacted like this after Vatican 2, what a different world this might be!
MT ignores the dismal reality I posted of Pope Francis' time as Archbishop in Buenos Aires. It must be nice to live in fairyland.
Post a Comment