Fr Z has fisked the dreadful editorial that appeared in this week's Tablet undermining Summorum Pontificum and attacking the good Archbishop Ranjith. See Unsigned editorial in The Tablet: craven prejudice against those who want the older Mass.Personally I have always refused to read the Tablet except on rare occasions. It went the wrong way in 1968 (when I was 10) in response to Humanae Vitae and since then, including all my adult life it has been the voice of dissent from the Magisterium. It has long been given a respectful hearing in England far beyond it merits.
However, I am most grateful to Fr Z for his occasional sallies against its "craven prejudice" and what seems to be an increasingly bitter tone since the election of Pope Benedict.
17 comments:
It was enought to goad me out of semi-retirement too. I was just about to shut up shop (it's in "Drafts"), Pope Benedict having - to my profound gratitude - shot my fox. There's work to be done yet. My pal TTOny suggests changing the familiar soubriquet from Pill to Suppository, so as to locate the pain with greater accuracy...
The Tablet...that's an Anglican journal isn't it?
" The voice of dissent from the Magisterium."
Like you Father, I also seldom read The Tablet. I stopped after I read that awful edition following the death of John Paul II and the Election of Benedict XVI.
On the rare occasions since then that someone has drawn my attention to this or that 'good article' in the Tablet (is that an Oxymoron?) I have found myself reading a circular newsletter from Eccleston Square.
I always advise people in our parish to "stop taking the Tablet" Ha! Ha! Ha!
William
Never read the rag!
The worldwide humanist revolution has always depended on two factors:
1) Control of information flow to the masses
2) Control of all major world institutions
With vatican 2, the opportunity to distort the councils intentions and gain control of the church was taken. Unfortunately as HV showed this never reached the top, hence the pope in their own diocese attitude. Were we to get a "liberal" trendy Pope & curia we can be sure the E&W bishops conference would enforce all of Rome's pronouncemets to the letter with great zeal. They thought they had succeeded with the election of JP1 but did not reckon on the Holy Spirit.
The coming of the internet has blown out of the water the pyramid structure of the media where the few provided information to the many
Is it any wonder they are all so bitter.
You sadly have to wonder how many of our bishops actually do believe in God, as Jesus described Him, rather than some wishy washy vague concept of a benelovent creator who lets people do as they like. As the natural world shows, where animals kill and eat each other daily to survive, God can be infinitely ruthless as well as infinitely loving.
Have you ever considered the practical difficulties for bishops of implementing Summorum Pontificum? Many have never celebrated the extraordinary form in their lives and the same applies to the majority of Catholic priests universally. Given the pressure on most at a time of serious decline the task of learning Latin sufficiently well to use the rite, plus the detailed instruction, plus the difficulty of internalizing it, present insuperable barriers. Give it time and its use will gradually trickle back but it will never become the daily bread of Catholic liturgical life it once was but will remain a relatively rare option. One point made in the Tablet is true. The historical episode of the Counter-Reformation is over. The Holy Father himself was, and remains, in the forefront of theologians who returned to the Church of the Fathers. That rich source affected Vatican II more deeply than any other influence and was bound to amend a practical model that had only existed for four hundred years.
Oh dear. I had moderately high hopes when Catherine Pepinster took over as editor; we used to live in the same parish, and she struck me as quite sane. In fact, she has given space in the past to some sensible writers: Peter Gumpel on Pius XII, Alcuin Reid on the liturgy, &c. But the editorials are getting more and more shrill. This latest will delight the Tablet's ageing and dwindling subscription list, but any other potential readers will find it quite offensive, I think. You don't have to be a die-hard traditionalist to think that Archbishop Ranjith has a point. Thank God for the Catholic Herald.
Have you ever considered the practical difficulties for bishops of implementing Summorum Pontificum?
Well no, as it happens. There aren't any. Bishops are not required to DO anything whatsoever, except concede priests and people their rights. What's "difficult" about that?
One point made in the Tablet is true. The historical episode of the Counter-Reformation is over.
True or not, it's absolutely irrelevant to the question. Summorum Pontificum is concerned with the ancient, historic, traditional liturgy of the Roman rite, as it developed until 1962, in its integral texts, rubrics, calendar. Or do you suppose that the "Tridentine Mass" was produced ex nihilo in 1570? Is this what you mean by "a practical model that had only existed for four hundred years."? The Roman Missal before and after Trent differs in details that it would require an expert to detect. Perhaps you're also proposing that Trent represented some kind of positivistic rupture with the Medieval Church, akin to that pursued today by the Tabletista tendency, and denounced by the Pope?
...theologians who returned to the Church of the Fathers. That rich source affected Vatican II more deeply than any other influence...
Where to begin... this is a piece of "ecclesiastical correctness" of course, an ideological assertion merely, on which the credibility of the "reforms" was erected and continues to depend. It's complete nonsense. That the post-Conciliar Church in its externals and in its characteristic theologies or liturgical expression, is closer in spirit and in truth to the undivided Church of the first millenium is perhaps something devoutly to be wished, but it's comically remote from reality. I'm trying to imagine the Novus Ordo Good Friday intercessions in the mouth of St Ignatius of Antioch or St Leo the Great. You get the picture.
it will never become the daily bread of Catholic liturgical life...
I wouldn't be too sure about that. My children have never attended anything else (with the exception of occasional visits to Orthodox divine Liturgy). They're certainly not unique in that respect.
moretben , LOL Ttony is so right.
That is exactly what I'll call it from now on.
SUPPOSITORY.
As long as it is piled high in our Cathedrals and churches, there`s very little we can do about it. Many Catholics are getting their ideas about how the Church is, and should be, from The Tablet. Its editor is courted on radio programmes and amongst the chattering classes. Surrender, I say. Spend an extra hour in front of the Blessed Sacrament praying that it folds.
The Tablet is generally an ill-informed and offensive rag, especially to any Catholic who loves teh Church's teaching. Do the opinions of the likes of Pepinster and John O'Brien (Catholics for a Free Choice)really matter? To use a recent quote from a rugby referee "Opinions are like bums, everyone has one".
Moretben tell us that TTony suggests 'changing the familiar soubriquet from Pill to Suppository'. Moretben - you (and I suppose, TTony) have never had to have a suppository, have you? They're far too good to be associated with the Tablet - unlike The Pill.
The Tablet is the most balanced and scholarly Catholic periodical in print. It gives voice to sensible, well-reasoned, scholarly, logical pieces. It is to be found on the coffee table of every Catholic theology professor in Britain and its writers are always given first choice when an expert view is required in the secular media. The only reason you people dislike it is because you are everything that it is not - unbalanced, frivolous, unreasonable, unscholarly, and illogical.
its writers are always given first choice when an expert view is required in the secular media
That's not actually true but if it were, it would tell us little of value.
Even my most theologically liberal friends would freely grant that the Tablet is written from a particular standpoint. The idea that it is a scholarly beacon of impartial analysis is, frankly, ludicrous.
But just to keep up the frivolity - I'll agree that the Tablet is well balanced - the contributors have a chip on both shoulders.
Anonymous
I plead guilty to all of that. And something else you forgot:
Catholic.
Anon says "[The Tablet] is to be found on the coffee table of every Catholic theology professor in Britain."
Perhaps this is why we have so much Protestant theology swirling around in Britain, challenging the Magisterium. And increasing rejection of Humanae Vitae amongst laity. Or perhaps Anon is just not sufficiently cathechised in Catholic teaching to be able to benchmark the Tablet's general content against Rome's orthodoxy - on liturgy, theology or Catholic morality.
'But just to keep up the frivolity - I'll agree that the Tablet is well balanced - the contributors have a chip on both shoulders'.
LOL!!!!! Fr Tim that's great! I wonder if 'anonymous' is the Pill's editor, or some other anti-catholic employee ???
It's pages are full of dissent and pompous whitterings. My wife and I subscribed to this paper in the early 90's (knowing no better - it looked 'prettier' than the other Catholic papers). Within months we realised we had 'backed a real pup', cancelled our subs and requested the balance be sent to charity. Wouldn't be surprised if they sent the money to IPPF! haven't read it since and mutter the prayer to St Michael every time I pass by a copy.
Post a Comment