There are two kinds of heterodox Catholics today, or at least two main types, the heterodox left and the heterodox right. They are one coin with two sides.
The heterodox left, the majority of Catholics, are all over the place as it concerns the true identity of Catholicism and individual Catholics and parishes. They are like reeds swaying in the wind, embracing every fad and trend in society and culture no matter how opposed these are to Jesus Christ and His splendor of Truth.
But they are all over the place and aren’t as organized as the heterodox right. Although they are catching up with the German synodal way and its organized heterodoxy where an entire nation may repeat its schism during the Protestant Reformation—a horrible wound to Church unity then and now, now!
The heterodox right are more organized with their heterodox rejection of Vatican II, an ecumenical council approved by both the pope and bishops in union with him.
They truly want what will never happen, the abrogation of Vatican II. The model for this is the SSPX but also other groups. SSPX is in an irregular union with the pope but not quite yet in a true schism. But there are other groups, similar to the SSPX, the sedevacantists, who are in true schism. But nothing on the right compares to what is happening on the left that might consume an entire nation—Germany!
Pope Leo in his Vatican II catechesis, must make clear what is the authoritative interpretation of Vatican II and call out heterodox interpretations on the left and right, and enunciate what these heterodox interpretations are. He must not leave things ambiguous—call out with examples the heterodox left and right as it concerns Vatican II!
At the same time, I hope the Holy Father will make clear that there can be differing opinions on how best to engage the Eastern Orthodox, Protestants, non Christian religions, agnostics and atheist and the world in general.
His Holiness needs to distinguish between holy engagement with the non-Catholic world but not embracing the “world, the flesh and the devil” as the heterodox left love doing. Nor can the Church embrace puritanical views that are a kind of neo-Jansenism, prevalent with the heterodox right.
As is concerns Sacrosanctum Concilium, Pope Leo must make clear what the problems are in the Bugnini Mass that are not faithful to this document and show a path to rectify it, the reform the reform! That will not be too difficult to do because it is so obvious that not only is the Bugnini Mass not in continuity with what Vatican II taught, but what has happened in the development of its implementation is even further away, in terms of liturgical abuse and also what is called inculturation.
In the south where I live, if you want a particular form of inculturation, just how would you do it with the “redneck” communities? See the problems?
But to all the heterodox right, fidelity to Vatican II means that the liturgy will experience a revision from what was celebrated in the 1962 Roman Missal.
1. There must be the preservation of Gregorian Chant for the Propers and Parts of the Mass which then preserves Latin and Greek in every Mass. The other parts of the Mass, orations, prefaces, Eucharistic Prayers should have the option of the vernacular—Just think how this alone will enable priests to celebrate Mass which includes all language groups in his parish at one Mass! Did Vatican II demand a multiplicity of Eucharistic Prayers and Penitential Acts? NO, NO, NO !!! Did Vatican II even imply that the core order of the Mass should be changed? NO, NO, NO!!!!!
2. Declare that “noble simplicity” referred to the Pontifical Mass rubrics and the Solemn Sung Mass, with deacon, subdeacon and MC—I think that is what SC was most concerned about, not your typical parish low or high Mass.
3. Revisit how deleterious to the reform of the Mass was “ressourcement” meaning going backwards in time to the early Church Fathers and how the Mass might have been celebrated then and in the catacombs or in “house churches”. This led to the stripping down and tossing of almost every organic development in the Latin Rite by Bugnini. Fortunately, Bugnini didn’t have the authority to do the same thing to the Eastern Rites whose liturgies still have their 2,000 year tradition of organic development of their liturgy!
4. Revisit the revision of the lectionary and why an expansion was not added which kept the ancient lectionary as at least Year A. And while the pope is at it, why Scripture is changed or eliminated when it comes to dropping the propers for individualistic choices to replace them!
As it concerns the revised lectionary, many today acknowledge that the Sunday Lectionary has too many readings: Old Testament, Responsorial Psalm, New Testament, Gospel Acclamation, Gospel. The older lectionary just had the Epistle, Gradual/Alleluia (tract or sequence on occasion) and Gospel. Having more Scripture on Sunday should have been limited to making the Ancient Lectionary year A and then Year B and C modeled after Year A’s original lectionary. Doing it this way would add more Old Testament Readings and readings not found in the Original Lectionary. But at the same time, not overwhelm participants at Mass with too many Scripture readings. And do not allow the Scriptures that are the propers of the Mass to be changed or eliminated!!!!
5. And shall we speak about the debacle of modern idioms of music, secular tunes, with religious words?
No comments:
Post a Comment