Some Thoughts on Motu Proprio Mania
By Mark Shea
Top 10 neglected Vatican stories of 2007
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Summorum Pontificum
Your source for news and information concerning the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.
Official Documents
Blogs to See
Books
Key Resources
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(191)
-
▼
January
(26)
- SP January 31, 2008
- SP January 30, 2008
- SP January 29, 2008
- SP January 28, 2008
- SP January 27, 2008
- SP January 26, 2008
- SP January 25, 2008
- SP January 24, 2008
- SP January 23, 2008
- SP January 22, 2008
- SP January 21, 2008
- SP January 19, 2008
- SP January 18, 2008
- SP January 17, 2008
- SP January 16, 2008
- SP January 15, 2008
- SP January 14, 2008
- SP January 12, 2008
- SP January 9, 2008
- SP January 8, 2008
- SP January 7, 2008
- TLM Returns to Denmark
- SP January 5, 2008
- SP January 4, 2008
- SP January 3, 2008
- SP January 2, 2008
-
▼
January
(26)
9 comments:
Mark Shea is a Protestant pretending to be Catholic. His article is a backhanded swipe at the Traditional Mass and Traditionalist Catholics. We would all do well to ignore anything he has to say.
Pretty tough talk for a guy labeled "anonymous."
David,
The statement in the first comment, above, is either true or false. People can decide for themselves.
Besides, some folks with blogs take themselves too seriously. Personally, I do not give more weight to an opinion because some guy has his own blog complete with hat pictures.
In reference to the Mark Shea article... I do get the feeling that this is a kind of long-winded exercise in "fence-sitting", claiming that now that the traditional Catholics have "their Mass" back, they should get on with worshiping and stop complaining. The indifference displayed by the "I'm satisfied with MY novus ordo Mass, but if you prefer the TLM, so be it" attitude is CLASSIC (and I mean CLASSIC) Cafeteria Catholicism. Of course, this IS in the Catholic Register, and their readership would easily be able to relate to such a viewpoint. Perhaps as long as we ourselves don't practice abortion, or support the death penalty, it's OK for others to do so as long as they prefer it. What this article misses is that the liturgy is not a matter of "preference"...really....it's not! We can stand or kneel at communion, receive on the tongue or in the hand, go to confession or not, hold hands at the Our Father or not, and presumably decide to do or not to do just about everything else in the "Church of Our Preference". God forbid we should be asked to do something that we don't want to...
man with black hat: Two Left Shoes
"The purpose of any and all ritual, from time immemorial and in all cultures, is not to call attention to itself, but to draw attention to something beyond itself. That focus can be lost just as easily when introducing the usual hand-holding and back-slapping before Communion, as it can when frowning indignantly on anyone who responds in a low voice in their pew along with the altar servers. In addition to being wrong, both miss the point of being there."
"Personally, I do not give more weight to an opinion because some guy has his own blog complete with hat pictures."
Well, you really should, you know? With any luck, you'd learn that some guys with "hat pictures" can back up the things they write before they present them as fact, and do precisely that with regularity. You might also learn that the statement in question did not presume to be a matter of opinion, nor did it offer much in the way of proof.
Besides, some folks in comboxes take themselves too seriously...
This Mark Shea article is not new. It was posted at http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=380 in early November. There was a link to the article on this website on November 2nd.
There are over two-hundred responses to the article on the Chronicle website. Most of the comments are critical of Mark Shea's article. Seven or eight of those comments were my own.
The comments at the Chronicle website are lengthy and deal with the specifics. Mark Shea seemed to become frustrated and responded by asserting that the people who were critical of his article were just posting in a combox. Mark Shea is the one who needs to learn to back up what he says.
On this website, on November 2nd, I posted the following comments about the Mark Shea article:
Liturgy you focus on is liturgy that’s not doing its job, which is to refer us to God, not to itself.
I agree with the premise that the purpose of the liturgy is to refer us to God--not to itself. However, I do not agree that the two forms of liturgy under discussion are equal in this regard. I believe the Traditional Latin Mass is a superior expression of the Faith.
That’s one of the reasons for the motu proprio, to try to give succor to those injured by dreadful abuses of the Paul VI Rite.
Anyone who has read the pope's (Cardinal Ratzinger's) writings on the issue of the liturgy would know that he finds fault with the new rite. This is not simply a matter of creating an alternative for those who are upset about abuses.
"as it can when frowning indignantly on anyone who responds in a low voice in their pew along with the altar servers"
I suppose that there are elderly attendees who frown in this fashion, but it is not going to make me not attend the extraordinary form of the MAss, any more that it should influence Mr. Shea. Mr. Shea's attitude is not too surprising, since he is convert. I wouldn't call him a protestant, however. He is just an opinionated, stubborn convert, who prefers the ordinary to the extraordinary, and doesn't like it when people beg to disagree.
"I suppose that there are elderly attendees who frown in this fashion..."
Actually, the worst offenders are people who weren't even BORN in 1962. And if you think it stops me from attending, click here and scroll down.
Post a Comment