The incomparable John Zmirak wrote recently about ongoing conflict between Latin Mass aficionados ("Trads") and their trendier Catholic brethren ("Non-Trads").
Here's the windup in his masterful explanation of the conflict:
"Of course, there's something to be said for a liturgy whose very nature resists and defeats abuses. The Ordinary Form can be extraordinarily reverent when said by a holy priest. I've been to such liturgies hundreds of times, and I'm grateful for every one. On the other hand, the new liturgy, with all its Build-a-Bear options, is terribly easy to abuse. The old Mass reminds me of what they used to say about the Catholic Church and the U.S. Navy: "It's a machine built by geniuses so it can be operated safely by idiots." The old liturgy was crafted by saints, and can be said by schlubs without risk of sacrilege. The new rite was patched together by bureaucrats, and should only be safely celebrated by the saintly."
With that in mind, here's the pitch:
"Here's what we Trads have realized, that the merely orthodox haven’t: Inessential things have power, which is why we bother with them in the first place. In every revolution, the first thing you change is the flag."
The whole essay is worth a read. Zmirak goes deeper than applying Marshall McLuhan's axiom about how the medium is the message to liturgical practice, and his witty romp through recent Catholic history may even be fascinating to non-Catholic Christians now sorting through the detritus of "seeker-friendly" services or trying to hold fast to something like the Westminster Confession while their neighbors read Joel Osteen and feel their way sideways in parts of the so-called "emergent church" movement.
In short, Zmirak is always entertaining. The man has a few peers who typically write on more secular subjects., not least P.J. O'Rourke, but P.J. has mellowed with age and is not as prolific or acerbic as he used to be in the go-go days of the Reagan administration.
Molly Ivins? Meh. I hope she rests in peace, but as a columnist she was (and still is) overrated by the "truth to power" crowd.
On the other team (mine), Ann Coulter is a streaky shooter, as likely to foul out of a game as to hit a three-pointer from the top of the key.
Tom Maguire, on the other hand, remains too little known. My hat's off to his mocking appropriation of the Battle Hymn of the Republic to describe House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on the eve of President Obama's kabuki theater of a "health summit" -- "he has sounded forth the trumpet that will ever blow retreat." James Taranto has more on that subject.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I found Zmirak entertaining as always but in the end unconvincing. Perhaps because his point about the Ordinary Form being wonderfully reverent when said by a holy priest is exactly what I've experienced and clearly he has too ... yet still he moans, groans and complains. Those Rad Trads (or as I like to style them, Pharisees) still are clinging to outward signs that are not necessarily reflective of the inward reality. And what I've read of the reworded "new/old" liturgy that's coming (next year?) will restore much of the troublesome wording that was problematic. I'm not on the side of the ribbon-dancing Sadducees, don't get me wrong, but both sides seem to miss the point ... which I find in the middle with the Eucharist and the very fact that the Church has remained true to Her calling so long largely because of her ability to be flexible without missing the point. Those "saints" who crafted the old liturgy were often the beaucrats of their times and that point is often forgotten. My current reading of the Fathers of the Church reminds me of that point. If we remain too rigid then we are brittle ... we break.
I don't think I said this very clearly ... oh well.
Dang, I meant to say that the reworded liturgy that is coming will restore much of the original meaning to the now troublesome wording that was problematic. Or something like that. It will fix things ...
Julie,
Our Bible study group got into a similar discussion a couple of weeks ago. It started by my saying that one of the things I used to like about the trad Mass was that I could go anywhere and know exactly what was going on, even though I did not understand the language. Many of the younger people (as a 60-year-old, that is anyone 50 and under) said it didn’t matter to them, whether people sat, kneeled or stood. It was still all the same. I answered, “No, it isn’t the same.” The non-essentials do matter, ritual matters, ask any anthropologist. It does not prevent transubstantiation, nor the giving of grace, rather it manipulates the disposition toward and the understanding about the essentials among the people.
What can easily be missed in the article is the fact that so many Catholics (the polls taken say 70%!) do not believe in the Real Presence of the Eucharist. For many it is a talisman they are obligated to receive to get to heaven. So while the Church has stayed true, her children have not. They have been manipulated and co-opted. Just as our culture has by the feminist pro-choice movement. Remember that those leading the charge for the gay rights movement stated clearly, they would take a page from the feminist movement and change the way society thinks by changing the meaning of our language.
The old liturgy taught by doing, by imprinting if you will. Everyone has a particular way of learning, some people are audio learners, others visual and some learn mostly by doing. In all cases, adding the physical action to idea, makes retention and understanding skyrocket compared to only reading or hearing. Bowing my head at the name of Jesus, genuflecting to the tabernacle, kneeling for communion, receiving communion on the tongue, repeating ‘Lord I am not worthy’ while striking my breast, all these actions taken together instilled in me the truth of what was going on at every Mass; the great mystery and majesty of it all. Christ (God) the King is present here in this place, I am with Him, I am not worthy but He loves me so much, He feeds me with Himself.
So I think John’s point is dead on balls accurate, as Mona Lisa Vito would say. Yes, the Church has stayed true, in spite of all the monkeying around since Vatican II, but John recognizes the efficacy of action(s) to the deeper understanding of ideas. Change the flag, change the words change the ritual and you change the mind and heart. If you ask me, the feminist movement and now the ‘gay’ movement learned the truth of this from the progressives in the Catholic Church.
I hear ya.
Except for the fact that our parish while using the ordinary liturgy respectfully is about as Eucharistic as they get.
I respectfully submit that we must look to the priests. And speaking of flags, aren't we missing the point on that? The flag is the crucifix. That is the same everywhere. Whether one holds one's hand over one's heart or bows one's head while paying respect as it passes by, the heart remains the same. And similarly for the crucifix. It is not THE thing itself, that would be the Eucharist. But whether the Mass is in Latin or English, as long as the translation is good (and it is going to be better once the new one gets in), it matters little because it is about the substance contained therein.
"dead on balls accurate"
Really? Nice language to use to a lady. Is this a reflection also of how culture reflects the Latin Mass, which I assume you attend thanks to your passionate defense of same, as well as your attachment of feminist, homosexual social changes to the Ordinary Mass. Sir, for shame. Show a little culture please.
Sorry, I was quoting My Cousin Vinny and we love that movie in our house. It referred to the veracity of John's article and had nothing to do with the Mass. And no I do NOT attend a Latin Mass. While I see the educational value in some of the rituals of the Latin Mass, I do not feel the need to travel to one. Our Eucharist is valid. Our music is what irritates me but I was a protestant for years and even today, when I join my husband each week, the music is heaven bound.
Might point is that while some do not need the ritual, much was learned from it. And the fact is that the very people John discusses, Call to Action types, misused language and continue to appropriate words to confuse and confound, just as the feminist movement did and the gay rights movement does. Many of the same people populate these groups. This doesn't equate any of those horrid ideologies withe the CHurch. It equates the horrid progressives within the Church with them.
Julie,
I love the Church and I see all this bickering between trads and others as a sad thing. I have my opinions as you can see, but I will not tell someone to get out or they are not Catholic or or or...on the other hand, I realize one can't let everything slide when CCD teachers tell you, "It doesn't matter to me if Jesus were married to Mary Magdelene. It doesn't change anything." Au contraire!
I took the flag to mean the Mass NOT the crucifix which by the way is not in all parishes (though it is supposed to be!) Mine has a large cross with the Risen Christ on it. I do not like it visually, I miss the Crucifix. However, it only hit me recently that this is all wrong theologically. One must go through the cross to get to the Christ. My priest and I discuss these things all the time. We disagree but we respect each other's Catholic faith. He has turned me from being very traditional and orthodox to being more pastoral and orthodox. I still see the value in the traditionalist (like John, not the rabid pharisee types)concerns, but I do not pound my fist...I joke and for that I apologize.
You are very blessed to have a Eucharistic church and yes, I totally agree we must look to our priests in all of this, but the fact remains that the non-essentials do matter.
Actually, I love that movie too.
In a very round about way, I was making a point. Pick a culture. When the Latin Mass was everywhere no movie would have had a young lady with that line, no matter how hard boiled. And certainly no gentleman would have quoted it to a woman. If you're sticking up for it and ALL it stands for (including a long ago time in the USA) then be consistent. :-)
The thing is, again, I say that we have to look to more from our priests. We kneel for communion at the only altar rail left in Dallas, chant some Latin during our most formal mass, have a Latin chant solely for music during our Saturday p.m. Mass, genuflect, strike our breasts during the "I confess" and so on and so forth.
This is because every priest for our parish respected these things and incorporated them into the Novus Ordo. (sp?)
My husband, the cradle Catholic, when I told him about this conversation, said, "What would St. Jerome say about this ... with his newfangled Latin Vulgate in the people's tongue? I want to go back to the Greek and Hebrew."
There's a lot of history of things changing. The thing is that we are just outside of that "40 years of upheaval" that has been seen after every great council of the church. It is just now time that things can begin settling down. Truly, the best place that I can see is with a Mass that people can understand ... reverent, with education about it, but understandable. We can't go backwards or you will see a fleeing as never before or so it seems to me.
Cheers ...
Post a Comment