It has been a wild ride since the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI and the election of Pope Francis.
Several times already, after making some commentary, I have been accused of ‘attacking’ the Pope. This has risen to a new level with my post on liturgy and humility in response to the asinine and divisive comments of Cardinal Mahony.
But here is the interesting thing. Many of the lines that I tweeted were things I wrote months ago for a possible post on liturgy but never published. When I wrote them, they would have seemed obvious and boring and 100% in line with Catholic thinking and the Pope.
But since I published them them this week, the are perceived by some as beyond the pale and an outlandish attack on the Pope. Same lines. Different month.
There is something very un-Catholic about that, Catholic in the universal and timeless sense. How can my comments seems like boring and obvious orthodoxy one month and an attack the next.
Something is profoundly wrong when the winds of change can blow so swiftly through an immutable institution of God’s own making.
Suffice it to say, if my comments seem like orthodoxy one month and an attack on the Pope the next, what is clear is I am not the problem.
March 18, 2013 at 4:06 am
Can someone explain to me what that even means?
It's an anonymous poster. If it doesn't make sense, ignore it.
What are some examples of these other folks that you think seem to be worshiping the Mass?
…the vestments aren't as fancy, or it's not said in Latin, or the priest isn't facing the altar?
Having never had the chance to go to an EF Mass, I wouldn't know, but I do know that when I contrast the genuinely humble with the "humble" that I've seen, the problem is that everything is stripped with an intent to make a statement rather than with an aim to purity of purpose– think the thing a few years back about glass not being suitable for the goblets, when I know I've seen stuff I wouldn't put out for company used before that.
Or the "simple" vestments I grew up with, hand-made and hideous in felt, vs the inexpensive but beautiful ones my mom's birth-Parish had– I can remember they had gold-colored thread, and the colors were vibrant.
When you buy your mother flowers, do you go pick a handful of weeds because they are humble and look it's flowers the thought's what counts, or do you go find the most lovely flowers you can– thistle or daisy or the one wild rose from the middle of the patch?
Christ can be present in the worst places. That's no argument for deliberately putting Mass in the middle of a feedlot.
March 18, 2013 at 4:31 am
"How can my comments seems like boring and obvious orthodoxy one month and an attack the next."
Simple explanation, Pat.
You published these 'tweets/lines' in the midst of a near-hysterical traditionalist response to the election of a Pope that few of us know that much about.
Had you written "'Humble' liturgies are like ugly babies, you pretend to admire them to spare your host's feelings. But the baby, while a miracle, is still ugly" several months ago, this juvenile line would have elicited little attention beyond your regular readers.Now, the cat's out of the bag now. The elitism of the traditionalist movement has been exposed, as has – sadly – it's fragility and immaturity.
March 18, 2013 at 6:02 am
I still do not understand why the traditionalists are all in a huff (aside of not getting Burke). I will tip my hand a bit and say I prefer an almost Cistercian simplicity about the Mass. That simplicity means a sense of quiet awe, purposed action, and chant. I also love Eastern Liturgies, particularly the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom with its beautiful chants and multi-layered symbols ( I also have a thing for full prostrations). I also love the Novus Ordo when done with respect and when focused on God. My vestments are simple without looking cheap, as is my chalice, and other vessels used at Mass. I am a big believer of less is more (with the exception of incense…love the incense) and noble simplicity. I do not begrudge those who like more as long as it is not gaudy or tacky (and let's face it…fairly effeminate). I have seen videos of the gatherings in LA with the Religious Ed (note I can not bring myself to call it Mass in any conventional sense of the word) and I am guessing that the Holy father would no sooner drag that into the Vatican than his predecessor.
March 18, 2013 at 8:12 am
*sigh* And blogger ate my comment. Of course. It had been more than 20 minutes since I last logged in.
Picture of the Pope exhibiting simple but elegant– and, notably accentuating a killer grin.
Short version of the much longer comment:
simple isn't needfully bad, but a lot of damage has been done to strike a pose of "simplicity." The symbols you mention, I've slowly found out– heaven knows that the supposed "religious education" several parishes offered didn't cover so much as the Catechism, let alone Church history and symbols– use to be a more universal thing.
That is a crying shame.
From what appears to be embroidery on various parts of the Pope's clothes there, I'd say he's just fine on the distinction between simple-and-respectful vs "humble."
I would not go that far with some of those who take his presentation choices as a chance to get nasty about the prior Pope(s).
March 18, 2013 at 12:27 pm
The evil one doesn't care how he divides the Body of Christ, as long as he does it. Now he's using the vehement adherents of every type of the Mass for that end. Successfully. To the extent that we foster or throw fuel on that fire, we are each responsible.
March 18, 2013 at 12:53 pm
"What are some examples of these other folks that you think seem to be worshiping the Mass?"
Not from you, obviously. And both Mssrs. Archbold have been fine. There is one entire blog, which will go unnamed, in which comments akin to "sins against the liturgy" have appeared abundantly over the past few days. That would be the same place someone commented that going to anything other than an EF mas was "punishing your soul." Seriously. The term "antipope" has come up more than once in reference to Pope Francis because of his liturgical deviation from the ideas of some quarters. I could link entire threads.
March 18, 2013 at 3:07 pm
Hooray Patrick! You know that I am behind you 100% funny thing all this praise for humility and simplicity…the people praising it ain;t living it for sure! Oh yeah and if people have a problem witht he vestiture what wyould they say about the Vatican adorned in beautiful and mostly intricate art? Nothing simple there…I guess if Roger Cardinal Mahony had his way he would be a t Home Depot right now ordering up HGTV's latest color to paint over all the walls and ceilings there…
Its so comical that he goes on and on about simplicity… How much did he go over budget on the "Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels"? $50 mil I have been there, it is certainly not simple, yet not beautiful…I guess he defeats his own version of logic…Sad…
March 18, 2013 at 3:15 pm
Sorry Patrick I forgot to publish my name with the comment "Hooray, Patrick"
March 18, 2013 at 3:31 pm
Fr. Bill Peckman: Every week I serve two Sunday Masses — one EF, the other OF. Both are celebrated with ceremony and a certain splendor, but I trust nothing vain or superfluous. As one who has MCed hundreds of Solemn Masses in both forms, and trained others to serve therein, I can assure you that in a well done EF Mass, noble simplicity is observed by the utter lack of gratuitous elements. This is not the same thing as impoverishment or minimalism; rather, every action has its meaning and purpose and is performed without fussy theatricality. The EF Mass is a rich tapestry, but being the work of the greatest of artists — ultimately, the Holy Spirit — it possesses a sublime coherence, integrity, and economy. Do not be put off by elements unfamiliar or even mysterious to the profane life, but accept that, any authentic encounter with God being on his terms, it necessarily includes elements of awe, mystery, and strangeness — none of which should be seen as worldly or self-regarding or irrational.
Romulus
March 18, 2013 at 4:16 pm
Not from you, obviously. And both Mssrs. Archbold have been fine. There is one entire blog, which will go unnamed, in which comments akin to "sins against the liturgy" have appeared abundantly over the past few days.
Without context, I can't even offer empathy for the frustration. (Nope, not going diving for it!)
March 18, 2013 at 5:13 pm
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, ultra-montanism is absolutely, totally run amok in the Church. And for many souls, the Church has become a cult of personality centered on the reigning Pontiff that even the very indirect appearance of criticism must be mercilessly attacked.
I never even thought about Pope Francis in your post on Mahony. All I thought was that you were rebutting, quite well, one of the most destructive prelates of the Church.
Amazing. This view of Papal primarcy is not what was intended, and is very, very different from traditional Catholic faith and practice. But, it has served the progressives incredibly well.
March 18, 2013 at 5:21 pm
Allegations of ultramontanism always crop up on either side, whichever point of view the Pope has that's not liked by the other side.
The Pope is the Pope. He's not God, he's not your diocesan Bishop. He's not to be worshiped, he's not to be dismissed out of hand because he has views you don't like.
March 18, 2013 at 5:26 pm
If anything, his approach to finery shows two things.
He's a religious priest who has an affinity for poverty.
He's very Eastern in his outlook (was an Ordinary for the ECs other than the Ukrainians), so for him the papacy isn't a vestige of monarchism.
I'm fine with either expression of papal authority. I would like reunion with the Orthodox in my unborn great-great-grandchildren's lifetime, so we will see
March 19, 2013 at 2:42 am
mrflibbleisvryx, you don't "appreciate" anything. Appreciation isn't followed by condescending, arrogant insults.
March 20, 2013 at 3:01 am
To Anonymous who's not a traddie but is worried,
I think that the political correctness is a media-generated illusion. Even most of the Catholic press would rather not create controversy to kick off a new papacy. I'd like to see the Pope adopt a more "elevated" style, but he's far from "politically correct." He has, on a number of occasions I've found, been quite forceful in stating Catholic Truth plainly, and on a wide range of issues.
I'm not into proclaiming someone's greatness a week into a job, but I think that it's worth remembering that it's only been a week… that Pope Francis has a lot more to show us. And, his career to this point has had some pretty awesome high points.