From the "When It Rains, It Pours" Department

Bishop Robert Lynch has come under criticism of late for his baffling statement on the Terri Schiavo case.  I admit to being among those at least perplexed by his comments--see my remarks here. The folks at Adoremus Bulletin have called attention to some other baffling statements by Bishop Lynch.  For instance, his statement that he sees himself in a middle position between the Church's liturgical law and what he calls "proper liberation from law."  Addressing the national meeting of the Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions in October, he declared, "I would understand that it is my duty to find the middle between the law and proper liberation from the law which might allow for cultural or local adaptations which are not in strident disagreement with the law."

Since part of a bishop's ministry is to uphold the Church's liturgical law, it is perplexing to hear a bishop describe his task as taking a middle position between the Church's liturgical law and "proper liberation from the law."  The implication is that the Church's liturgical law routinely stands in opposition to proper freedom. 

http://www.adoremus.org/0305NewsViews.html

Comments

[Joseph Previtali]

If only His Excellency would read St. Thomas' Treatise on Law, he would understand that the discipline of the Church falls under the New Law in the Spirit.

"Nevertheless the New Law contains certain things that dispose us to receive the grace of the Holy Ghost, and pertaining to the use of that grace: such things are of secondary importance, so to speak, in the New Law; and the faithful need to be instructed concerning them, both by word and writing, both as to what they should believe and as to what they should do." (IaIIae, 106, i.)

Good point on the implication that the Church's law stands in opposition to proper freedom. We are so misguided today in how we use the word and think about freedom. Thanks to William of Occam, freedom has been treated as something distinct from our human nature and something only of the will -- what we today would call "license". This has even plagued the language of some of the Church's magisterial formulations. It seems to me that it will only be when our notion of freedom is corrected -- in our thinking and in our speaking -- that the beautiful moral teaching of Christ will be fully understood and accepted.

[Bubbles]

I realize the Mass is not something to be interrupted or disturbed. However, has it never occurred to any Catholic to stand up during one of Lynch's (or Grahmann's or Gumbleton's or Egan's...) bullshit festivals and shout, "Excuse me, but if you're going to preach heresy and lies, why don't you find yourself some nice episcopalian church to do it in?"