There are at least three things (and likely many more) to keep in mind about the MSM when it comes to rather involved, complicated stories such as the recently released Motu proprio:
1. More often than not, the MSM is going to get a lot wrong. There will probably many references to restoration "the Latin Mass", without comprehending that the "ordinary form", or Novus Ordo, is the Latin Mass.
2. More often than not, the MSM will emphasize the "conflict" angle between the enlightened "liberals" and the nasty "conservatives".
3. More often than not, the MSM will paint Benedict as reactionary, backwards, out of touch, etc.
See, for example, some recent headlines from Google.com:
Concerned Catholics, rabbis and priests question revived Latin Mass USA Today
Pope's easing on Latin rites sparks outcry New Zealand Herald, New Zealand
What's Latin for 'No one is happy?'National Post
Bishop mourns Latin decree, Jews ask for clarityReuters Canada
Latin mass a looming headache for Catholic parishesWashington Post
ADL says Latin prayers a body-blow to Jews Spero News
And, of course, the usual suspects are again offering their usual suspect stuff. The Chicago Tribune reports:
Rev. Thomas Reese, senior fellow of the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, predicted the document would have greater impact in European countries where local bishops have rejected calls to offer the Latin mass.
In the United States, Reese said, more widespread celebration of the Latin mass is likely to appeal to senior citizens who recall the mass from their childhood, as well as a new generation of conservative young people, who Reese believes have become enamored by Latin for the wrong reasons.
"The mystery of the Eucharist is not that it's in Latin," Reese said. "The mystery is the death and resurrection of Jesus that's being celebrated here. To have the mysteriousness of Latin blocking you from seeing the true mystery is one of the reasons we went to English."
So folks who are interested in the extraordinary form of the Latin Mass are attracted to it because they believe Jesus spoke Latin? And, of course, it's implied that these are the same people who have no idea what the Mass is all about. Just like the untold millions of Catholics who celebrated the Mass in Latin for so many decades and centuries before, right? Not only are the laity who want it rather slow of mind but apparently the average priest doesn't have the gray matter for it either. From the USA Today:
For most Catholics, however, Benedict's action "much ado about nothing… with "no great impact in the pews beyond creating more problems for an already overworked priesthood." says David Gibson, author of a book on the pope's battles with modernism, The Rule of Benedict. ...
But Gibson says initial offerings of the Latin Mass could look like a Catholic amateur hour. He pictures, "a play where the star, the priest, is like a last-minute stand-in reading from a script he doesn't understand, assisted by mystified altar servers."
As Reuters reported, some liturgical experts were crying, apparently literally:
"I can't fight back the tears. This is the saddest moment in my life as a man, priest and bishop," Luca Brandolini, a member of the liturgy commission of the Italian bishops' conference, told Rome daily La Repubblica in an interview on Sunday.
"It's a day of mourning, not just for me but for the many people who worked for the Second Vatican Council. A reform for which many people worked, with great sacrifice and only inspired by the desire to renew the Church, has now been cancelled."
I didn't realize that some of the most vital and essential work of Vatican II was to get rid of the Tridentine Mass; I must have missed that in the documents. Maybe I should have read them in the Latin?
And there are non-Catholics upset by the Motu proprio, as reported by The New York Times:
Amid opposition from other Jewish groups, the Anti-Defamation League condemned the change on Saturday, calling it a “body blow to Catholic-Jewish relations.” While an earlier reference to “perfidious Jews” was removed officially from the Tridentine Mass just before the council, which set the stage for progressively better relations between Jews and Catholics, the group condemned a remaining prayer on Good Friday calling for Jews’ conversion.
“We are extremely disappointed and deeply offended that nearly 40 years after the Vatican rightly removed insulting anti-Jewish language from the Good Friday Mass, that it would now permit Catholics to utter such hurtful and insulting words by praying for Jews to be converted,” Abraham H. Foxman, the Anti-Defamation League’s president, said in a statement.
ZENIT reports on this topic:
The 1962 missal was promulgated with an apostolic letter issued "motu proprio" by John XXIII "Rubricarum Instructum." The missal does not make reference to "perfidious Jews."
On Good Friday in 1963, John XXIII underlined the importance of this decision when the old formulation of the prayer for the Jews was read. The Pope interrupted the liturgy and asked that that the liturgical invocations begin again from the beginning, following the new text.
The Roman Missal adopted by Pope Paul VI in 1969, and put into effect in 1970, reformulated the prayer. It reads: "Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant.
"Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption."
Yes, that really is offensive...if you don't like people praying that you will "arrive at the fullness of redemption." Of course, Foxman seems to be offended that Christianity even exists, just as Fr. Joseph O'Leary, of the "Spirit of Vatican II" site, is offended that Benedict is being so "divisive" and bringing about what he calls "Motu proprio madness":
The new Motu Proprio reflects clearly the rather idiosyncratic opinions of Joseph Ratzinger, opinions that have always been controversial and divisive. ...
The faithful will be choosing between a Tridentine Mass at 9 and a Novus Ordo Mass at 10. This is a troubling scenario.
Yes, very troubling: Imagine the horror at having to make such a choice. Oh no! We can't have mature, grown adults making decisions for themselves—unless, of course, it comes to rejecting Church teachings about sexual morality, something that Fr. O'Leary is much more positive about (the rejection of the teachings, not the teachings themselves).
On a far more positive and orthodox note, check out Jimmy Akin's commentary on the Apostolic Letter, Father Powell's thoughts about the "six stages of dissenting from the M.P." (note that Fr. O'Leary is already embracing most of them), and a number of helpful posts over the "New Liturgical Movement" blog, which contains this advice:
Scenario 1: The Unsympathetic Pastor
What if the pastor is not sympathetic?
1. Pray daily and ask God to give you the wisdom to know what you can change and help you accept things you cannot change.2. Go to Mass regularly, even if things are not to your taste. Be a visible and supportive member of the parish.
3. Become more active in parish activities so that your pastor sees you as a pillar of the community, whose ideas are backed up by generosity and hard work, not just a nag who just wants things.
4. Give your pastor Pope Benedict's books on the liturgy.
5. Join the parish choir (or start one) and, after you have proven yourself a devoted member, begin to suggest incremental use of traditional music and chant.
6. Run for parish council and, after being elected, bring up the possibility moving the liturgy in the direction of the "spirit of Pope Benedict XVI." Be patient.
7. Give positive feedback every time the pastor does anything that seems to be moving in the right direction. Avoid complaining about things you don't like--this is always counter productive.
8. Pray regularly to the God who softens hearts and wait in patience. Recite an Act of Faith every morning. Continue to educate yourself (e.g. read copies of the books you give your pastor).
9. It may take a long time, or even a change of clerical staff, but eventually you will probably eventually discover that you have a pastor who is more sympathetic. [emphasis added]
An excellent book to buy for yourself and for others is Ratzinger's The Spirit of the Liturgy. Many other essential books and articles about the liturgy can be found on the "Spirit of the Liturgy" website:
I'm so glad we have Fr. Reese here to tell us these things!
Posted by: Tom | Sunday, July 08, 2007 at 07:47 PM
Oh my gosh Carl, I clicked some of those links, and my eyes...they burn!
Posted by: BillyHW | Sunday, July 08, 2007 at 07:56 PM
I'm 36 years old and was born after the Council, but I have had the opportunity to attend the pre-conciliar liturgy as well as the Novus Ordo celebrated in Latin. I prefer the Novus Ordo due to the fact that it opens up a wealth of Scripture.
Growing up in California, to use the language of Fr. Thomas Reese, many things "blocked" seeing the true mystery of the liturgy - but it was never the Latin language! It was more often when the Priest was considered "the star" - as David Gibson says. Actually, in my experience, things were more like a show where the Priest was an MC and the "music ministers" were the stars...
In any case, I think Bishop Luca Brandolini shows why this was very, very necessary. The only way this could be the saddest day of his life is if Vatican II truly, in his words, has been "cancelled". The only way he could interpret it as having been "cancelled" is if he saw the Second Vatican Council as a break or rupture - and it has now been definitively stated that no such break or rupture exists. Thank you Pope Benedict!!!
Thank you Carl for also exposing how spurious the anti-Semitism charge is.
Posted by: Marie | Monday, July 09, 2007 at 06:02 AM
On the quote from Fr. O'Leary: "The faithful will be choosing between a Tridentine Mass at 9 and a Novus Ordo Mass at 10. This is a troubling scenario."
It's only a troubling scenario if we presume the faithful to be so shallow as to not see the same Lord re-presented in the liturgy, regardless of whether it's the extraordinary or ordinary form. Perhaps that's the root of the fear--that by the way we choose and not by the choice itself, we will see more of ourselves as we really are.
Posted by: rd | Monday, July 09, 2007 at 07:33 PM
A great test for Orthodoxy: When Fr. O'Dreary thinks that something is divisive, it usually is good and orthodox!
Posted by: Rick | Tuesday, July 10, 2007 at 03:59 AM
Carl: you're such a troublemaker. :-)
If you want a good laugh, hop on over to the Nashunal Katholik Reeportur Online. Sister Joan Chittister is gathering rusty razor blades for a collective wrist-slitting of anguished feminists.
"There is a power and a beauty in both liturgical traditions, of course. No doubt they both need a bit of the other. Eucharist after all is meant to be both transcendent and transformative. But make no mistake: In their fundamental messages, they present us with more than two different styles of music or two different languages or two different sets of liturgical norms. They present us with two different churches....
"From where I stand, it seems obvious that the Fathers of Vatican Council II knew the implications of the two different Eucharistic styles then and bishops around the world know it still. But their concerns have been ignored. They don't have much to do with it anymore. Now it's up to the laity to decide which church they really want -- and why. Which we choose may well determine the very nature of the church for years to come.
Right: "Let's just start our own church, then. "Church-in-a-Box: Just add disobedience, with a healthy dash of spiritual pride." Someone else also once said, non serviam, and look where he is now. How loudly can you scream, "hermeneutic of rupture"?
http://ncrcafe.org/node/1221
Posted by: Fr. Arsenius | Tuesday, July 10, 2007 at 03:06 PM