Interesting commenterary over at First Things today (of course!) on Pope Benedict’s authorization of the Tridentine Mass. This section caught our eye:
By associating the Latin Mass that is now universally approved with John XXIII, Benedict steals a card from the deck of liberals and progressives, for whom John XXIII is always “good Pope John,” in contrast to his successors. But this is much more than a deft rhetorical move. “Summorum Pontificum” is a thoroughly liberal document in substance and spirit, remembering that liberal means, as once was more commonly understood, generosity of spirit.
In his letter to the bishops, Benedict is directing them to be generous in embracing the fullness of the Catholic tradition and responding to the desires of the Catholic faithful. This is proposed in contrast to the rigidity, bordering sometimes on tyranny, of a liturgical guild that mistakenly thought that the Second Vatican Council gave them a mandate to impose their ideas of liturgical reform on the entire Church.
ha HA!! Score!!
“Hey, Buddy, you’re Liberal!”
— 1989 campaign slogan of U.S. Senator Connie Mack III
Yep, that’s the beginning of the slippery slope. First you exhibit a generosity of spirit and the next thing you know you’ll be marrying gay monks.
This pope has both a liberality of spirit–and a backbone. He wisely saw how the Church accepts many different rites and liturgies. There is the Ambrosian Rite in Milan, the Carmelites and Dominicans have slightly different liturgies. And the Anglican Use parishes use a form of the Book of Common Prayer (if I have the tile right). And of course there are the liturgies of all the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome. The only ones left out in the cold had been those who love the Latin roots of the Roman Church.
I am in favor of the vernacular, but my hope is that the revival of more Latin will drive the silliness and irreverence from the vernacular Masses.
Well, ruidh, would that Anglicanism had a majority of Pope Benedict XVI-style liberals. Imagine – generosity of spirit without sacramentalizing sexual, relational and familial variety – that would be a step forward, wouldn’t it?