Sunday, January 30, 2011

The modern liturgical mess: another Catholic asks why
From FB:
I do not understand the stance of some priests who are quite orthodox theologically yet have little or no issue with liturgical abuses. I suppose because of the profusion of liturgical abuse as being the “norm”. Is it because the versus populum orientation, communion in the hand, banal liturgical forms/music are seen as in the “spirit of Vatican II” and being “with it”? It’s a mystery ...
One reason there are orthodox Catholics who say only the doctrine matters is the Thomas Day factor. The persecuted Irish couldn’t have nice churches with big public ceremonies so they discounted those things. That became the dominant RC mindset in English-speaking countries. Before Vatican II Fr Leonard Feeney, hardly considered a liberal, actually wrote ‘dogmas come first, not liturgies’.

Now that I think I understand the issues, I appreciate the view that ‘the essentials didn’t change and that’s all that matters’ but I still don't think I could live with the abuses. Too big a disconnect between the faith on paper and the practice: if I wanted to worship like a low-church Methodist I’d be one.

That and in my experience the people pushing the changes usually are heretical and want you to be too. Just like trads and like unself-consciously traditional Catholics in history, the liberals believe in lex orandi, lex credendi. The orthodox, or conservative Novus Ordo in the Paul VI and JPII eras, obeyed the changes but didn’t start them.

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment