Probably because he is cranky.And he has a right to be. Not only are a noticeable segment of devotees of the Traditional Latin Mass being complete jerks about it, but in responding so predictably to the recent piece by Steve Skojec at InsideCatholic.com, they completely missed the most succinct and convincing defense of their plight to date.
Can you imagine having the Mass that you grew up with taken away and replaced with something alien and unfamiliar? How do you think it would feel to be treated as though you are schismatic for simply clinging to the Catholicism of your youth? Would you appreciate being called a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a Pharisee for holding to your traditions and devotional practices? And how would you like to be marginalized, forced to drive 50 miles just to get to a Mass held at 1:30 in the afternoon in a parish that doesn’t want you there, and where it’s impossible to build real community because it’s local to none of the attendees? It’s as if everything these people knew about Catholicism was suddenly gone and replaced by a cheap imitation, and when they expressed their dismay, they were met by smug replies that Vatican II "did away with all that."
He's right, of course. But the worst offense of these contrarians is betrayed when they defend their own view of those traditional practices. Imagine being shushed by some arrogant little twerp who wasn't even BORN in 1962, because you are joining in the chanting the Kyrie and other sung parts of the Mass from your pew, as every pope of the 20th century had urged. Every one of these miscreants should be tied to a chair, and forced to read a brilliant piece entitled “Liturgical Principles & Notions: Concerning the Dialog Mass” by Louis Tofari.
Then they should be released, if only to write on the blackboard one hundred times: “Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.”
.
5 comments:
The list of Traddie Stupidities is almost endless.
Judging by the violations of rubrics espoused by one relatively major Order of priests, it's fair to conclude that they think EVERY change in the EF since ~1890 is illicit--or at least doesn't pertain to THEM.
....and then they complain that the laity 'fails to obey' them!
Thanks for the link on the dialog mass. I wish my local FSSP parish would do this. (In particular level c dialog mass).
I think it is a shame that this kinda thing doesn't happen more often as it would help people make a transition to the EF more easily in my opinion. As of now there are times when I go to low mass, will be in the third row, and cannot hear the priest praying the prayers at the foot of the altar.
Needless to say, I am still quite happy to have the EF available in my diocese.
"Judging by the violations of rubrics espoused by one relatively major Order of priests ..."
Which one?
I think dad29's referring to the ICKSP. They're known for incorporating pre-1962 practices into their Masses (Confiteor before Communion, servers kissing the priest's hand). And they celebrate the EF in the archdiocese of Milwaukee.
Actually, the incorporation of many practices eliminated in the 1960 Code of Rubrics (and therefore the 1962 Missal) are officially tolerated. This would include the "second Confiteor" (including its sung form at Pontifical and even Solemn Masses), the "solita oscula" (customary kisses), and even some pre-1955 practices for Holy Week (such as the procession for Palm Sunday originating in another location). What would concern me the implication that maintaining these practices is some sort of litmus test of orthodoxy, as well as the growing discontent over changes made under Pope Pius XII to begin with, especially for Holy Week and Easter Vigil.
Post a Comment