"It is a well-known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
--Douglas Adams
On this first Sunday of Advent, after two years of low Masses, our parish has finally gotten to the point where we have a schola and are in a place where we can assist at a sung High Mass, replete with 10+ servers and a MC. Although I have never had a problem with low Masses (and because of our circumstances, I always just figured they were the norm, though they should in fact be the exception), it felt so fitting to come to a place where the Misa Cantata is now in place. To top it off, after a year-long absence, we had hospitality once again in the basement. A High Mass and donuts--can you ask for anything more?
I give our young pastor a lot of credit and respect for deftly navigating not only the size restrictions during COVID 2020, adding additional Latin masses, dealing with the disgruntled contingent of hardline parishoners who left because of masking, all while managing three parishes and serving as the vicar for the diocese (the diocese in which the POTUS attends Mass, mind you) while a new bishop was ordained and installed.
It's a weird place to be in currently, though. After Traditionis Custodes was issued this past July, many of us felt punched in the gut and feeling like we were on shifting sands and borrowed time. I had read the motu proprio when it came out; it felt not only sloppy, I also had to agree with Fr. Peter Stravinskas who wrote at Catholic World Report that
"Francis’ letter to the bishops comes off as judgmental and mean-spirited, reeking with a hermeneutic of suspicion. It is highly ironic that the Pope intent on extending “mercy” to gay activists and adulterers (that is, the divorced and remarried) should not exhibit one ounce of pastoral solicitude for faithful Catholics. If the dire situation of disunity he posits is in evidence somewhere, would it not be incumbent on the diocesan bishop to deal with it? Someone suffering from a hangnail doesn’t qualify for the amputation of his finger or hand. In reality, it is perversely amusing that the Pope engages in the very conduct some “Rad-Trads” do when they come upon a liturgical abuse in the “mainstream” Church and thus accuse the OF of the problem."
What exactly is a apostolic letter written "motu proprio?" From New Advent:
"The name given to certain papal rescripts on account of the clause motu proprio (of his own accord) used in the document. The words signify that the provisions of the rescript were decided on by the pope personally, that is, not on the advice of the cardinals or others, but for reasons which he himself deemed sufficient. The document has generally the form of a decree: in style it resembles a Brief rather than a Bull, but differs from both especially in not being sealed or countersigned. It issues from the Dataria Apostolica, and is usually written in Italian or Latin. It begins by stating the reason inducing the sovereign pontiff to act, after which is stated the law or regulation made, or the favour granted, It is signed, personally by the pope, his name and the date being always in Latin. A Motu Proprio was first issued by Innocent VIII in 1484. It was always unpopular in France, where it was regarded as an infringement of Gallican liberties, for it implied that the sovereign pontiff had an immediate jurisdiction in the affairs of the French Church. "
It's been almost five months, though, and to be honest, we have continued on with our liturgical worship as if it never happened. Whether that will change remains to be seen. It would certainly not make our bishop's life any easier were he to come down on the Latin Mass community, as he would be cutting off the hand that feeds the diocese and potentially driving many to the SSPX.
I am not enough of a hardliner or trad-idealist to want a return to a monarchy or that the Novus Ordo would be abolished. I just want to be able to worship God in the way most fitting for us as a family, and that is in the Tridentine Mass. I imagine those not especially warm to the TLM would want the same freedom to attend a charismatic Mass, your standard-fare N.O, or whatever. Summorum Pontificum (another apostolic letter issued, motu proprio, by Benedict XVI) gave us that freedom to do so with liturgical and ecclesial sensitivity (though, arguably by dyed-in-the-wool trads, that patrimony should have never been stolen from us). Live and let live, I suppose.
The vaccine mandates issued by President Biden had the same spirit in the U.S. when they were issued as Traditionis Custodes did for the Church. Heavy-handed and unnecessary except for means of control, potentially unconstitutional, and supported by questionable science. It made me think of the quote attributed to John Basil Barnhill, "Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty." The "uncooperative" minority of unvaccinated become scapegoats in the same way the minority of traditional Catholics are "threatening the unity" of the universal Church by the way they desire to give God due worship and are set up with strawmen arguments of "rigidity" and "uncharity."
Translation: Get in line, or pay the price.
It's one thing if you feel this particular President or this particular Pope are competent to make these decrees and have our best interests at heart. But I don't actually feel that way, and I don't think I'm alone. That doesn't mean we become anarchists or Protestants. For better or worse, we have a Constitution, due process, freedom of speech, right to assembly, freedom of religion, the Second Amendment, to name a few defining pillars of our particular nation. How they get interpreted and instituted, I suppose, is for judges, and constitutional scholars to sort out. In the Church, likewise, we have a Pope, a magisterium, and apostolic authority. But there is also the sensus fidei fidelium--the sense of the faith on the part of the faithful--as well as the rights of conscience (informed by the true faith).
Personally, I think both are an overstep that comes from a place of feeling threatened; they feel like power-plays. I don't want to see our traditional parishes and orders get shut down, and I don't want to see my friends lose their jobs because of these mandates should they choose not to get vaccinated. I know this desire probably doesn't mean much to those staring down the barrel of a gun, though.
I guess we will see how this all plays out.
No comments:
Post a Comment