tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post8317279038446574431..comments2023-10-05T08:25:13.232-04:00Comments on Biblical Evidence for Catholicism: Reports of the Death of the Reform of the Reform are Greatly Exaggerated (Peter Kwasniewski and Fr. Thomas Kocik vs. Pope Benedict XVI?)Dave Armstronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-55544929900297879582014-02-26T02:00:39.586-05:002014-02-26T02:00:39.586-05:00Dave wrote:
Both he and Dr. Kwasniewski have cro...Dave wrote:<br /><br /><i> Both he and Dr. Kwasniewski have crossed the line between critiquing abuses to now going to the roots and saying it is beyond all hope of repair because it is intrinsically or inherently flawed.<br /><br />That's what I am referring to with the baby / bathwater analogy: going from an abuse of the thing to the thing itself in its essence.</i><br /><br />I believe I agree with you on the prospects of not giving up but perhaps the reform should therefore take a different route?<br /><br />What I mean is this: examining the prayers, structure, form, and rubrics of both Forms of Mass reveals stark differences (and similarities of course). <br /><br />In my previous post I mentioned some differences such as the elimination of the prayers before the altar which have <b>extraordinary</b> doctrinal significance and symbolism. Or the requirements of the posture and attitude of the priest during the Extraordinary Form is greatly increased which indirectly communicates that the event is solemn and holy which helps curve pride by saying that the priest must do things in a limited way instead of how they choose to do it (also, it shows the laity that the Mas is not about pleasing them with many options thus aiding in abuse reduction). Or how when comparing side by side the lavabo prayers (for example) we see the Extraordinary Form is deep in beauty and tradition, a prayer organically developed and passed down by holy Church throughout centuries which screams with Catholic doctrine.<br /><br />So in keeping in the spirit of the Holy Father Benedict, perhaps the reform of the reform can take the route of re-introducing, albeit in a slow and prudent fashion, traditional rubrics and prayers such as the ones mentioned above?<br />ToShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08299290219645878946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-64974213435925679942014-02-26T01:47:34.139-05:002014-02-26T01:47:34.139-05:00It will be interesting to see where liturgical dev...It will be interesting to see where liturgical developments take us. <br /><br />There is legitimate argument over the structure of the Ordinary Form seeing as how many wonderful prayers were axed during the reforms (like the prayers before the altar) or watering down of others (such as the offertory and the lavabo). <br /><br />A restoration of organic and traditional prayers even in the Ordinary Form such as the ones mentioned would be a beautiful addition to the reform of the reform. Legitimate organic development and the adjustment of the Extraordinary Form which fits how it developed throughout history is also welcomed of course! <br /><br />Actually even admitting that the reform needs reform harkens back to the men who started the reform process way back in the 1940s – if you examine history you will see how they duped the Pope and the Liturgical offices throughout the 1950s or how they had meeting concerning their intentions but never reporting their discussions to Rome. Very underhanded things, not worthy of sanctity of course but eventually the hand behind the drafting of the Vatican II document that became Sacrosanctum Concilium and of course the commission that construction the Ordinary Form (another example of their intentions was that they tried to eliminate the orate fratres prayer).<br /><br />Of course the Holy Father Benedict saw these things, he saw the men and their intentions behind the liturgical reforms.<br />I don’t think the reform of the reform is dead at all, there is still much more traditional elements that must be restored and novelty eliminated.<br /> <br />Of course if another Pope one day decides differently then we shall follow, much like how Pius XII recommended we do not do certain things to the liturgy and Paul VI turning around and doing them anyway – there is a certain positivism to that though which we must watch out for, turning off our brains and mindlessly not thinking. Cardinal Ratzinger did not follow that path though fortunately.ToShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08299290219645878946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-22413897150574832652014-02-25T23:12:59.603-05:002014-02-25T23:12:59.603-05:00Dave,
Been a long time reader and fan of your bl...Dave, <br /><br />Been a long time reader and fan of your blog but I must say I respectfully disagree with you here.<br /><br />It's not merely a matter of abuses. The Ordinary Form lends itself to being celebrated a myriad of different ways that break with the liturgical patrimony of the Latin Rite. And these are not just abuses, but something that is allowed by the legislation itself. Just take a look at the papal masses over the years, and how they differ from region to region, from event to event. All legitimate, according to the current norms in place.<br /><br />Furthermore, I don't think these so-called Naysayers are as far from the mind of the Pope Benedict XVI as you portray them to be.<br /><br />Recall Cardinal Ratzinger's famous words, calling the Ordinary Form a banal, on the spot, production:<br /><br />"What happened after the Council was totally different: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy.<br /><br />We left the living process of growth and development to enter the realm of fabrication. There was no longer a desire to continue developing and maturing, as the centuries passed and so this was replaced--as if it were a technical production--with a construction, a banal on-the-spot product."<br /><br />http://iteadthomam.blogspot.ca/2010/07/card-ratzinger-novus-ordo-reform-was.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-51272681934232063132014-02-25T20:17:02.233-05:002014-02-25T20:17:02.233-05:00Both he and Dr. Kwasniewski have crossed the line ...Both he and Dr. Kwasniewski have crossed the line between critiquing abuses to now going to the roots and saying it is beyond all hope of repair because it is intrinsically or inherently flawed.<br /><br />That's what I am referring to with the baby / bathwater analogy: going from an abuse of the thing to the thing itself in its essence. That is what should be seen as alarming and outrageous and contrary to Pope Benedict in this discussion.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-78770790923986135412014-02-25T20:03:47.837-05:002014-02-25T20:03:47.837-05:00In response to Fr Hugh, Mr. Armstrong wrote: Same ...<i>In response to Fr Hugh, Mr. Armstrong wrote: Same bad "throw the baby out with the bathwater" thinking...etc...</i><br /><br />How is Fr. Hugh's statement about the new Missal encouraging creativity problematic or contradictory to Benedict? It seems rather a statement of the obvious and something that Benedict would agree with.<br /><br />In the new Missal one quite often finds formulae such as 'the priest says this or something similar' or, 'it is possible to say...' <b>These formulae of the Missal in fact give official sanction to creativity;</b> the priest feels almost obligated to change the wording, to show that he is creative, that he is giving the Liturgy immediacy, making it present for his congregation; and with this false creativity, which transforms the Liturgy into a catechetical exercise for a given congregation, the liturgical unity and the ecclesiality of the Liturgy is destroyed.sradaganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15973827429730464529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-15145667165041648192014-02-25T13:24:34.118-05:002014-02-25T13:24:34.118-05:00Do you wish to elaborate and actually make an argu...Do you wish to elaborate and actually make an argument, or just "hit and run"?Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-81243178973333522912014-02-25T13:19:44.106-05:002014-02-25T13:19:44.106-05:00Coming into the Church, your arguments concerning ...Coming into the Church, your arguments concerning the Catholic/Protestant divide were very helpful to me.<br /><br />Now that I have been in the Church for quite some time, I do not find your comments about internal disagreements to be of the same caliber. I find them to misunderstand the nature of the disagreements and pointlessly harsh…and harmful.Stephen Spencerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13301884569989243932noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-60973767410737228802014-02-25T12:39:00.354-05:002014-02-25T12:39:00.354-05:00Dear Fr. Hugh,
Thanks so much for taking your tim...Dear Fr. Hugh,<br /><br />Thanks so much for taking your time to respond. I have replied to your comment at length, at the end of the paper.<br /><br />May God bless you in all things.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-86991345046882983492014-02-25T12:37:54.224-05:002014-02-25T12:37:54.224-05:00Nick,
I will write to them now.
I changed a few ...Nick,<br /><br />I will write to them now.<br /><br />I changed a few things. It's still very hard-hitting, but justifiably so. If I didn't think these arguments deserved the treatment I gave them, I would have written differently. But serious error sometimes needs to be treated rather harshly (as I explained in my reply to Fr. Hugh, which is now added to the end of the paper).<br /><br />Prophetic denunciation is a legitimate thing, in its proper place. People simply disagree when it is proper, and the recipients of it almost always react in anger. <br /><br />The ones who blast the New Mass do it all the time. They just don't like it when someone does it back, because they're used to preaching to their choirs and getting cheers and rah-rahs and back-slaps (the stuff of comboxes peopled by fan clubs). They can dish it out but they can't take it. It's time they heard some critiques of these seriously erroneous opinions.<br /><br />They call a spade a spade (so they think); so do I (so I think). We merely disagree on the nature of the "spade."<br /><br />Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-58806729147943294062014-02-25T12:02:47.376-05:002014-02-25T12:02:47.376-05:00I think that's a good idea, Dave.I think that's a good idea, Dave.phatcatholichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06723028878747648927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-29387528228857939432014-02-25T11:04:16.319-05:002014-02-25T11:04:16.319-05:00Dave, have you alerted Peter Kwasniewski and Fr. K...Dave, have you alerted Peter Kwasniewski and Fr. Kocik to this blog post? I would be interested in reading their responses.phatcatholichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06723028878747648927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-83201926115951982932014-02-25T06:13:00.516-05:002014-02-25T06:13:00.516-05:00I shall be brief, and leave the others attacked to...I shall be brief, and leave the others attacked to defend themselves should they care to. However, it seems fair to say that all those you attack esteem Benedict XVI highly, and have read such of his works as "The Spirit of the Liturgy" and others that do offer a searching critique of the current OF Mass.<br /><br />Benedict XVI clearly confirmed the OF Mass as the norm, the status quo. He rarely raved about it.<br /><br />As for my supposedly throwing the baby out with the bathwater, even from the section of my post that you cite it is explicit that I believe the OF <i>can</i> be done well, and in fact that is something I try to do every day being someone who celebrates the OF Mass exclusively.<br /><br />If there is anything reactionary it is to be found in your tone, which has none of the quiet and reasonable politeness of those you attack. Indeed you come close to ranting. <br /><br />How this serves the Faith I do not know. That style of rhetoric may have worked in the protestant world, but it only alienates many otherwise sympathetic readers. In all things, charity: this should at least be our aim.<br /><br />Blessings.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com