Eamonn Clark, STL
Some things which are helpful for the continued consideration and implementation of “Traditionis Custodes” (TC) are below, as well as some of my own personal thoughts/observations:
St. Thomas on the changeability of human laws, as to improvements and as to the force of custom
Canons 85, 87, and 90 of the CIC – See Bishop Paprocki’s letter to his diocese for an example of this in action
Those who comment on the TLM as being full of “schismatics,” “division,” etc., have probably not spent very much time around large communities that are centered around the TLM and spend too much time reading blogs. It’s an off-base assessment, even if there is a kernel of truth.
Some “trads” really are too “rad.” They are their own worst enemy. Especially those who have remained around parishes/shrines/ministries without canonical irregularities, they will now have the opportunity to welcome or scare away all kinds of Curious Georges who have read about the TLM in the news and want to see what all the buzz is about. They need to play extra nice for a while.
There are plenty of new Mass advocates who are just as problematic as the rad trads, just in the opposite direction. They should sit this one out.
Following closely on that, those who think that the old Mass is causing problems and that it should therefore be done away with think much like those who are of the persuasion that “Facebook is killing people” and a sex-change operation will help those suffering the psychological disorder called “gender-dyshporia.” When there is a problem, it seems that as a general rule the true proximate efficient (“pushing”) cause has to be identified and addressed on the level which it actually exists. Biological problems call for medicine, psychological problems call for therapy, and spiritual problems call for spiritual remedies (good preaching, good confessing, more prayer, more fasting, etc.). A legal or liturgical remedy for a non-legal and non-liturgical problem is likely to cause more problems than it will fix, just like shutting down free speech on social media or cutting someone’s body apart to make them feel better about themselves.
It’s not clear what the right demographic is to measure how “popular” the old Mass really is. It’s certainly not “how many Masses/locations/attendees.” It is probably something more like “how many people discover the TLM and prefer it to the new Mass.” This is a more difficult number to find, but it would be possible if really desired.
Sociological studies have never before been used to determine how to legislate regarding the liturgy, at least as far as I am aware. And we do not even know precisely what the results of the survey were. It is odd, unprecedented, and unhelpful.
The predictions that TC will cause more division than unity are already coming true.
Many critics of the old Mass think that the preference is about taste. Perhaps it is for some, but many or even most TLM advocates have the opinion that the old Mass is not just subjectively better, like chocolate vs. vanilla, but is objectively better. It will behoove TLM supporters to explain why in great detail, and it will behoove critics to listen.
Pope Francis and those surrounding him ideologically truly believe that the liturgical reform was a special act of the Holy Spirit. This explains that somewhat bizarre statement of the Holy Father from some years ago during an address to Italian liturgists (August 24, 2017): “We can affirm with certainty and with magisterial authority that the liturgical reform is irreversible,” with the call to avoid “superficial readings, partial receptions, and practices that disfigure it.” Anyone who wants to address the real concerns of the cadre of prelates involved in drafting TC and pushing it will have to contend with this critical hermeneutic. It is just not subtle enough to dismiss them as “modernists” or “bullies” or what have you. They believe what they are doing is from God and defended by God. If you disagree, you will have to explain why without the ad hominem arguments, which will only solidify them in their opinion.
On the more practical side, TC is sloppily written, full of loopholes which are ripe for various kinds of exploitation. We will see many clergy take a “lacuna matata” kind of attitude, making broad use of the ambiguities in favor of their own desires – good or bad, it is just a fact. There has not been enough time for a lot of great canonical takes on TC, but be on the lookout.
I am not sure that the answer to my question in my previous TC post about whether a pope could suppress the Eastern liturgies is “yes.” We need to have the discussion about just how much the liturgy in its various forms belongs to the whole Church, which therefore acquires rights over their use. That discussion will need to be held by people better educated on these things than me…
For a while, this will be my last post on the Motu Proprio. More could certainly be said, but these are some things which I have not seen talked about so much which I think could help a fruitful discussion. Pray for the Holy Father, and for all bishops, to whom we owe due obedience and filial devotion, even when we think they act badly.
Comments are off.
One thought on “On the Motu Proprio “Traditionis Custodes””
Comments are closed.