This Video Will Make "Progressives" Nervous

La métamorphose d'un autel
Uploaded by CHRIST-REDEMPTEUR

This French video titled 'The Metamorphosis of the Altar' shows how FSSP priests and acolytes can transform a table altar into an altar for the Tridentine Latin Mass in just a few minutes. After the motu proprio, this can be done in your own parish, as well.

Any thoughts?

Comments

[A Simple Sinner]

An enterprising Catholic could make a lucrative living of "altar redesigns".

Of course the way some church's were built... Well you might need a back ho, crane, and wrecking ball to get started....

Anyone up for it?

[Patrick]

I enjoyed that. :o)

[Lily]

Mass starts in an hour, how soon can they be here?

[richard jaurigui]

I can't wait!!! Let's all double our prayers for pope B-16.

[Matthew]

wow, thanks for sharing the video ! I am loving it ! i have had this vision myself. We need to get this video to his Holiness pronto ! Sacred Tradition will triumph over modernism ! God wills it ! :D God bless the FSSP !

[Luke]

Let's not get too carried away here. I presume in this case some Masses use table altar and others the Tridentine one. If the congregation wants it then so be it. I think it's a little regressive to go back to archaic Latin Mass. The Tridentine Mass form is not for me and I hope it is not reintroduced across the board. But there's no real harm is there? As long as there's sincere, joyous worship with a living liturgy of the word celebrated in a loving and charitable community, then the Mass format is irrelevant.

[Patrick]

I think it's a little regressive to go back to archaic Latin Mass. The Tridentine Mass form is not for me and I hope it is not reintroduced across the board....As long as there's sincere, joyous worship with a living liturgy of the word celebrated in a loving and charitable community, then the Mass format is irrelevant.

Luke, I assume your use of the word "archaic" is meant to imply that the Traditional Latin Mass is obsolete and no longer appropriate. I beg to differ. The traditional liturgy is a treasure. It is part of your (Latin Rite) Catholic heritage. And, it is no more obsolete than the works of Shakespeare or Mozart. Furthermore, with regard to what is appropriate, I believe the TLM is a superior expression of the Catholic Faith.

Personally, I don't want to see the TLM imposed on anyone who does not care for it. I can assure you that there is no danger you will be forced to attend the TLM.

There is more to the Mass than "The Liturgy of the Word," joyousness, and community. I can find those things at a Protestant service.

The Mass format is quite relevant. It is an expression of our Faith. To say the Mass format is irrelevant is like saying the wording of prayers is irrelevant. St. Thomas Aquinas said that a small mistake in the beginning will lead to a big mistake in the end.

For example, the Latin text of the Eucharistic prayers (Novus Ordo) contains the phrase "...qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum." The correct translation of the words "pro multis" is "for many." However, the English translation of the Mass, for decades, has read "...It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven." By mistranslating one word (multis) the erroneous concept of universal salvation is implied. The Vatican has just gotten around to correcting this mistake after thirty-seven years. Thanks, but I will stick with the error free "regressive" liturgy.

[Qualis Rex]

Cute...although it did have a slight Benny Hill quality to it.

Luke, I am also going to give you the benefit of the doubt on your misuse of the word archaic. The Tridentine rite is eternal, not archaic. If it is beyond your capacity to appreciate it, then so be it.

[Cornelius James Krissilas]

I ask is Gregorian Chant 'Archaic'or 'regresive'? is the Byzantine Chant 'arhcaic'or 'regresive'is Palestrina or Bach or Handel or Mozart or Schubert or Verdi or Tchaikofski 'archaic' or 'regresive'?They are all Progressive Eternal and Classical!!! So the Traditional Tridentine Latin Liturgy and Mass is like the Traditional Byzantine Greek Liturgy and Mass and the Traditional Russian Slavonik Liturgy and Mass.They are all Progressive Eternal And Classical Rites of Christian Worship that have evolved and progressed through the Christian Centuries to become the most beautiful and spiritual and solemn Christian forms of Worship!!!...and the 'archaics'and "regressives'are those who want to return to 'ancient'and 'primitive'forms of Worship when the Church was a new-born baby,that is 'naked'and 'undeveloped'.!!!....it is like those who because when we were born we were naked and speachless,now we should go around naked again and keep silence and go live in caves wearing sheepskin clothing and walking on four legs!!!...these are those now who want a simple Table and no vestments and no candles and no incense and no organ and no flowers and no solemn rites and rituals no Latin no Greek no Slavonic!!! These are the 'archaics'and 'regresives'.

[Patrick]

Cornelius,

You make some excellent points. The traditional liturgies in all the rites were the product of what Klaus Gamber called "organic development" (see his book The Reform of the Roman Liturgy with the Ratzinger preface). It was a gradual process spanning centuries.

The post-Vatican II was the overnight creation of academics and elitists who sought to return us to THEIR idea of primitive Catholic worship. The fact that we lack sufficient knowledge of the early liturgies did not deter them.

By the way, if the motu propio does not come through, I will go East (figuratively speaking). I will move to a town with an Eastern liturgy. I often attended Ruthenian and Melkite liturgies in Southern California.

[Qualis Rex]

Patrick I know many people who have gone further east on this issue to the Orthodox church (not a bad decision in my opinion).

[Luke]

Patrick, Cornelius and Qualis Rex, I refer to the Latin Mass as archaic in the sense that marked by the characteristics of an earlier period, antiquated. My generation was born 30 years after the Latin Mass was phased out after Vatican II. Yet my parents and grandparents and their contemporaries who lived in the age of the Latin Mass all agree that this change was a positive one.

I agree that there may be problems with translation: then let's fix these.

I agree with the statement "There is more to the Mass than "The Liturgy of the Word," joyousness, and community. I can find those things at a Protestant service." I always listen intently to the words of the Eucharistic prayers and various rites and I find in the words and tradition such great depth which is such a treasure of our RC tradition.

However, a Mass said in Latin is a ceremony understood by very few. I, nor any young person, know or wish to learn the Latin language. A tragedy perhaps but we've many more serious matters to learn and worry about. To start with, our religious education was not as thorough as that which older generations received so now we have to catch up. I'm also completing the sixth year of law/engineering degree not to mention working 20 hours a week to cover living expenses. Moreover, Latin has such limited use in the modern world, and it is perhaps exclusively an ecclesiastical tongue. So why should we learn it? Should Mass be for the elite who understand Latin? Certainly not! We must be encouraging increasing participation in our Church and reaching out to those who've left the Church, not closing doors by reinstituting forms of worship no longer appreciated, understood or desired by the people.

I qualify this by saying that the few Latin Masses I've been to were wonderful, reverent and majestic in ways which I do not usually experience my weekly parish Masses. But I didn't know what was going on or how to respond nor I didn’t understand the traditions and nuanced rites. I was more an observer than participant. I like the incense, candles, vestments, music which bring great reverence and occasion to the Mass. But these things are peripheral to the real essence of the Mass, its meaning and purpose, and are not consistent with the Western world’s modern culture and expression of life. This is not the way Mass ought to be.

Perhaps I'm ignorant of the Latin Mass' meaning, heritage, nuances etc but Mass was never meant to be something you had to study in order to participate or benefit. It's not primitive worship to strip away centuries of excess tradition and ritual (note: this phrase doesn’t mean eradicate but instead cleaning and polishing the Mass so it once again shines and attracts the world back to the Church): it is instead the progressive reform necessary to bring our Church up to date.

I reject the various analogies of the Latin Mass with Gregorian Chants, Mozart, Shakespeare etc. I am a keen listener of classical music, I love Renaissance art and I will always enjoy Shakespeare's plays. But the Mass is a living memorial to Jesus' sacrifice, worship of God, expression of community, reflection on the Word. The others are beautiful, precious artforms to be enjoyed, admired and respected. Similarly, the Latin Mass too ought to be admired and respected but it is no longer relevant for many Catholics who wish to express their faith in their own language infused with their own modern customs. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, do retain important traditions, but let the faithful and God communicate through the Mass in their own way.

Let the Mass be a true celebration not just another ancient rite.

[Luke]

Two further points:

I like the incense, candles, vestments, music which bring great reverence and occasion to the Mass. But these things are peripheral to the real essence of the Mass, its meaning and purpose, and are not consistent with the Western world’s modern culture and expression of life. This is not the way Mass ought to be.

I also reject Cornelius’ extreme and disproportionate argument that to deny the Latin Mass is to regress to caveman-like primitiveness. This is not a debate about two alternative extremes: traditional, ritualistic, historical Latin Mass versus stark, austere, modern Mass. There is a very reasonable, practical middle ground which borrows from the Latin traditions but welcomes modern culture and experiences.

By the way, I'm really enjoying these blogs, some excellent thoughts, often from perspectives very different to my own. Keep up the great work everyone.

[Patrick]

Luke wrote:

Should Mass be for the elite who understand Latin?

Luke, my Native American grandmother, who could not read or write English (she signed with an X), had a better understanding of the Mass (in Latin) than many of today's educated people (in English). The prayers and rubrics of the Latin Mass are not an impenetrable mystery (although what occurs on the altar is a great mystery). There are books called "missals" which contain a translation of the Latin Mass. The epistle and Gospel are read in the vernacular from the pulpit by the priest. Furthermore, much of the Mass is the same each Sunday (the Ordinary). I can assure you that after a few Latin Masses you will recognize the Latin prayers. You already have many of them committed to memory in English.

I, nor any young person, know or wish to learn the Latin language...Moreover, Latin has such limited use in the modern world, and it is perhaps exclusively an ecclesiastical tongue.

Luke, it is unfortunate that you missed an earlier thread which included a discussion of the importance of Latin language in the modern world. You already have a Latin vocabulary. Many of your above words, the ones that consist of more than a few syllables, are Latin words (derivatives).

I like the incense, candles, vestments, music which bring great reverence and occasion to the Mass. But these things are peripheral to the real essence of the Mass, its meaning and purpose, and are not consistent with the Western world’s modern culture and expression of life.

Luke, think about this. Do you really want the Mass to be consistent with the Western world's modern culture and expression of life? When I am at Mass I want to leave the outside world behind. We should raise our minds and hearts to the sacred - not debase the sacred with wanton modern culture.

To start with, our religious education was not as thorough as that which older generations received so now we have to catch up.

Luke, are you aware that the Vatican II document on the liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilum December 4, 1963) contain the following?

"care must be taken to ensure that the faithful may also be able to say or sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them" (SC 54).10

"The Church recognizes Gregorian chant as being specially suited to the Roman liturgy. Therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services" (SC 114).

At this point I would like to point out that discussions of the traditional liturgy always get bogged down in a Latin versus the vernacular debate. The new Mass is not simply the old Mass in the vernacular. The two rites express different theologies, and they each have a distinct ethos. I would prefer attending the Tridentine Mass in English (accurately translated of course) to attending the New Mass in Latin.

Let the Mass be a true celebration not just another ancient rite.

The Mass is the unbloody representation of Christ's sacrifice on Calvary. The word celebration has several connotations. It can be used to describe a joyous festive event. Or, it can be used to describe "the public performance of a sacrament or solemn ceremony with all appropriate ritual." It is my belief that, in recent decades, we have focused too much on the former connotation and not enough on the latter. That is really what it means to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Luke, lastly, I would like to set your mind at ease. Traditionalist Catholics will not occupy your local parish churches and ban the New Mass in the vernacular. We will feel lucky to get a few TLMs here and there in an unused chapel.

[Qualis Rex]

Luke, there are so many things wrong with your post that it would be impossible to address them all. First, you say:

My generation was born 30 years after the Latin Mass was phased out after Vatican II.

Considering the first Novus Ordo missal was published in 1970, 30 years later would be 2000 and that would make you 7 years old?

Yet my parents and grandparents and their contemporaries who lived in the age of the Latin Mass all agree that this change was a positive one.

Yes, I know a great number of other baby-boomers who went through the "me" generation of the 70's who just LOVED the fact that instead of learning eternal prayers and traditions that they could just easily sit around and fake their way through a guitar-strumming version of "Kumbaya" instead. In other words, to be blunt, you, your parents and their contemporaries are entitled to their opinions, but that's all they are. Not really worth anything to me on this subject, because I have some of my own.

However, a Mass said in Latin is a ceremony understood by very few. I, nor any young person, know or wish to learn the Latin language.

Sorry, but you don't get to speak for all young people. I myself was born long after the Novus Ordo missal came out in 1970 and was not raised in the Tridentine mass. Yet I learned Latin and understand it simply because it is my herritage. If you are particularly lazy or unmotivated to do so, then that's your problem. But don't lump the rest of us in with you.

our religious education was not as thorough as that which older generations received so now we have to catch up.

First intelligent thing you've said. Now, connect the dots on WHY this is the case.

Moreover, Latin has such limited use in the modern world, and it is perhaps exclusively an ecclesiastical tongue. So why should we learn it? Should Mass be for the elite who understand Latin?

Once again, learning Latin does not make one "elite". Anyone can pick up a missal and read along in English if they don't know Latin. And because Latin is a "dead" ecclesiastic language, it means there is NO ROOM FOR CONFLICT with the verbage. In other words, no "It depends on what the definition of 'is' is." There is a reason and need for this.

Lastly, I resent your insinuation that those of us who wish the return of the Tridentine mass are not "reaching out" or involved in other issues. During my tenure at University and after I have been involved in a number of causes and volunteering activities, working with at-risk youth, Senior citizens, war refugees and immigrant populations.

I have a suspicion your judgement has been clouded by the generation you refered to earlier, which has apparently led you to gross prejudice and ignorance on the topic at hand.

[Patrick]

I know a gal who gave her newborn daughter a Sanskrit name back in the early seventies. The daughter, now in her thirties, recently traveled to Europe. She told me that she wished she had taken Latin in college instead of Italian.

She said with some knowledge of Latin she would be able to understand some Italian, read the inscriptions on the monuments, and have the basics of the other Romance languages (Spanish, French, Portuguese, etc). The grandmother is now homeschooling the grandaughter in Latin.

These people aren't even Catholic! They are New Agers. How is that for irony? We can't convince "Latin Rite" Catholics of the value of Latin. But, the hippies are studying Latin while listening to Gregorian Chant. The world is upside down.

[Luke]

I thank both Patrick and Qualis Rex (Like God?) for their contributions above.

I am sympathetic to many of the points Patrick makes yet I come to contrary conclusions. However, Qualis' argument is highly speculative and draws very tenuous conclusions and inferences from my words; it is no longer rational debate. I shall ignore your insulting remarks because you have never met me and know very little about me. But for the tyranny of distance, I would thoroughly enjoy meeting you all and debating this and other topics in person.

I was hoping for a debate about the modern liturgy - indeed the title of this blog suggests that this is a debate between progressives and traditionalists on the Mass. I was hoping for meaningful discussion of people's expectations and experiences of the Mass, opinions for change and reform. I wanted to read ideas for reversing the terrible trend of people leaving our church for, in my humble opinion, the more superficial faith endorsed by "mega" churches, particularly evangelical and Pentecostal varieties, or leaving the Church altogether. This means making Mass more relevant to modern society or changing society so it better appreciates and understands the Mass. I suspect the correct approach is a combination of both – indeed I am the perfect example, I need to learn more yet I find the existing Mass and former formats out of touch with my life experience.

Instead I have found entrenched traditionalists digging in their heels and attempting to douse the spirit of a young person seeking to make the Church more attractive to an increasingly secular, skeptical, individualist, materialist Western world.

I do not have a theology degree (I wish I had, but I’m still finishing two other degrees), hence the lack of knowledge of official Church documents and deep knowledge of liturgy. However, as I argued above, to experience God and celebrate his Mass (yes, in a solemn reverent way) ought not require such onerous scholarship.

I've been blessed with faith since birth. My parents are not "Kumbaya" superficial baby-boomers but instead are deeply involved in local churches, schools and community groups. I regularly read literature on the nature of God and Christianity in the modern world: however, Church sacraments are not my forte. I only wish that instead of finding Mass dull, and the Latin Mass even more so, I could fully participate in the Mass in a format and style more in keeping with my own cultural experiences.

It is not a matter of laziness or lack of motivation to learn Latin: I strongly believe this is not necessary and will not bring me any closer to God. It is however essential for me to learn more about the liturgy and Church tradition and we must encourage better catechesis education of children in this regard.

But let’s be realistic: very few young people are interested in discussing religion, let alone Christianity, and it’s even rarer to find youth keen to learn and practice Catholic faith. In Australia, approximately 30% of the population is Catholic, and about 10% practice regularly (weekly practice was 15% in 2001 which dropped by 13% from the previous National Church Life Survey, so 10% is a conservative estimate). Anecdotally (I wish I had stats), the rate of practicing young people would be much lower (my Parish Priest estimates only 6% of students from Catholic secondary schools practice after school). We have a real crisis.

There are a number of causes including (but not an exhaustive list) increasing materialism, skepticism, secularism, distrust of institutional religion, distrust of the RC Church due to sex scandals, disagreement with Christian morality (eg abortion, sex, stem cells), some laziness, complacency, and a much faster pace of living. More specifically (and particularly from former Catholics or those raised and educated as Catholics), we cannot ignore a lack of interest or dislike of our rituals, sacraments, traditions especially the Mass.

Some local protestant Churches have tried to reform the Mass (their “services”) by removing the art, vestments, traditional music, incense, Eucharistic prayers etc and have introduced rock bands, large screens, live-feed video cameras, professional colourful lighting and more. Some services are still warm, community events which still convey significant meaning but other services are now large song-and-dance presentations with more entertainment value than spiritual. I’m certainly not advocating going anywhere near this far; our Church has survived decline before and we should not divest our great heritage and tradition. However, these other churches are attracting greater numbers every week: so surely we can learn something and adopt some practices into our own liturgy?

This doesn't mean importing the negative aspects of modern society as Patrick suggests. It doesn’t mean removing the depth of tradition, solemnity, reverence and real meaning of our liturgies (and I’m learning much more about these aspects all the time). But I feel that Mass needs to be enlivened so that it allows a more contemporary expression of faith and remembrance of Jesus’ sacrifice.

Some ideas:

1. Increased lay involvement – we already have lay servers, lay special ministers, lay lectors, lay singers etc. Why not allow informed lay people to give sermons? Some priests are excellent pastoral carers, others excellent scholars, others still are great preachers. Few have all these talents. Our parishes, however, have many talented intelligent people with and without theology degrees who can offer the congregation excellent insight into the Word, Church and faith with real life experience and relevance to modern society. Let’s harness these skills.

2. Encourage increased youth involvement by allowing more contemporary (and perhaps less structured) Mass format. I know this will turn in their graves and offend many who read this blog. This reaction, however, is not necessary. I recognize the dangers of modifying or deleting traditional tried-and-tested rites, rituals and liturgies within the Sacraments, especially the Mass. Exactly how we alter the Mass ought to be discussed by scholars, clerics and youth in fluid dialogue and it is not my role nor within my sole capacity to suggest exactly how we can achieve this aim. I encourage change only following open, enlightened, intelligent debate. Some possible aspects that come to mind which could be improved or adopted as appropriate include: contemporary music, multimedia, passionate and engaging preachers, less structured and repetitive formats and increased use of plain vernacular (except formal vernacular should be continued for the consecration and other critical aspects of the Eucharist).

I’m always happy to read constructive criticism, alternative ideas and opposing arguments. However, please do respond with personal insults and degrading commentary. I recognize many people here far have greater knowledge on this subject, and many others than I, but I make up with this with my unwavering faith and deep desire and passion to learn, listen, debate and ultimately spread the truth and love of God. I respectfully need your help to achieve these ends.

[James]

"There are a number of causes including (but not an exhaustive list) increasing materialism, skepticism, secularism, distrust of institutional religion, distrust of the RC Church due to sex scandals, disagreement with Christian morality (eg abortion, sex, stem cells), some laziness, complacency, and a much faster pace of living. More specifically (and particularly from former Catholics or those raised and educated as Catholics), we cannot ignore a lack of interest or dislike of our rituals, sacraments, traditions especially the Mass."

---

Luke - I agree with you on the first part of your list about why so many youth are becoming non-practicing Catholics (or leaving the Church altogether).

But on the second part: If you impart to youth the idea that the Mass is meant to be entertaining, many will find the Mass is not so. But it never was meant to entertain. Many Protestant churches have fallen over themselves to create entertainments and spectacles galore on Sunday. That is not and never has been the right reason to go to church. Christ did not carry out the Last Supper to entertain the apostles.

We find, with the youth in our area, that if the rituals and traditions of the Church, along with a full and detailed explanation of the Mass, is provided - many become much more strongly attracted to it.

On your other suggestions - The reason it would be tragic to allow the laity to deliver homilies is that all sorts of unorthodox ideas and interpretations of Scripture would creep (nay, gallop) in. Even if such homilies were reveiwed, all sorts of wrong things would be added in in practice. This is, of course, already a huge problem with many priests; the problem would be compounded a million-fold by allowing anyone to homilize.

Finally - why is structure to be avoided with youth? Most youth, precisely, need structure in their lives and have very little of it.

James

[Becki]

This video is not going to make progressives nervous. I am one of those "progressives." If the church changes to a Latin Mass, I will stop attending Mass altogether. Simple as that. The other "progressives" will do the same. The Church will continue to lose more people, and stop growing.

[James]

"If the church changes to a Latin Mass, I will stop attending Mass altogether. Simple as that. The other "progressives" will do the same. The Church will continue to lose more people, and stop growing."

---

You know, you just have to laugh.

First, Becki, the Pope is only proposing to offer the traditional Mass to Catholics. You don't ever have to attend one! (Heaven allow...)

Second, if your faith is only as strong as the form of Mass that is offered, it is a virtually non-existent faith.

Third, orthodoxy and adherence to truth grows Christian churches - as witnessed by the huge expansion of Christian churches which stand fast against the tides of secularism and immorality and Satanic lies, and by the wasting away into little cults of those that don't (like the Episcopalians and the Unitarians).

James

[Luke]

James,

I agree that Mass is not supposed to be entertainment. If it is a true memorial of Jesus' death, it cannot be entertainment. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't endeavour to revitalise the Mass and at least investigate (do not read try without significant thought) some of the ideas which Protestant churches have tried.

I agree that many young people who still practice are attracted by the more traditional, even orthodox, Mass and sacraments. Yet their numbers are small, and a great number are walking away for precisely the reason that Mass and the Church is too rigid. A sensible solution is to offer both traditional and contemporary style Masses.

You are quite right that allowing laity to preach would open the floodgates of "unorthodox" teaching and theological interpretation. The challenge of maintaining and spreading the one truth already exists, and it is essential that different churches do not advocate vastly different theological interpretations. Our existing church structure and hierarchy is already well-equipped to ensure false teaching is not perpetuated. If we do allow lay homilies, it is essential that the speakers hold theology degrees or demonstrate sound understanding and knowledge of theology. As in any profession, continuing education and appraisal is also critical. Indeed, diversity within reason is what makes our Church so catholic and we would all greatly benefit from insights and teaching of a number of preachers at the parish level, rather than a sole voice at the pulpit.

One of my suggestions was that Mass structure could be loosened, not altogether avoided. Youth of different ages need different levels of discipline and structure. I find that after secondary school and the tumult of adolescence passes, I yearn for spiritual satisfaction, real meaning and purpose and this does not need to come neatly packaged in a traditional Mass format. I would prefer a Mass which retains the essential Liturgies of the Word and Eucharist, but why do we need the same rites and prayers every week as predetermined by a yearly schedule? Why can’t we have contemporary music? Why can’t we alternate readings so the scripture at Mass is pertinent to significant issues which are current in our community or major world events or incidents? The Word has an eternal quality which gives the faithful great meaning and guidance through all of life’s experiences so it would be great if we could, when appropriate (i.e not for major ecclesiastical events takes precedence), choose relevant scripture to reflect upon during Mass in order to help us in our lives during the week ahead.

I add that my life, and for many other young professionals, is (will be) very structured. Sixty-hour working weeks at a major corporate law firm tends to entrench discipline and structure. Same for other professionals, accountants, doctors, nurses, teachers, etc in their 20s who are still considered youth and are not appropriately categorized in the same group as teenagers and students in early years of college/university. “Youth” needs to be reconsidered: two groups with vastly different needs are unfortunately currently bundled in the one “15-25 year old” category.

Luke

[James]

Our existing church structure and hierarchy is already well-equipped to ensure false teaching is not perpetuated. If we do allow lay homilies, it is essential that the speakers hold theology degrees or demonstrate sound understanding and knowledge of theology.

---

Oh please, Luke. I can name ten priests in my local area who regularly give heterodox homilies full of fantastical Catholic lies. The bishops have never done anything about them - despite years of complaints. It's the same in lots and lots of places across this country and in other countries. The Church is rife with preists who are opposed to Church teaching on all sorts of things (or who refuse to defend Church teaching).

As for theology 'degrees'--- People with theology degress (such as from Notre Dame and other 'Catholic' universities, whose theology dept.s have been invaded by all sorts of liberal wacko dissidents fully opposed to Church authority), and who promote sodomy, abortion, divorce, universal salvation, all sorts of bizarre interpretations of Scripture, etc. etc. are a dime a dozen (nay, a dime a million). When I hear theology 'degree,' I run. A degree in theology just means one has studied some sort of ideas about theology. Big deal.

I will not bring my family to Church to hear some guy or gal with a 'theology' degree from some 'Catholic' school somewhere explain to me what they want me to hear, for any reason they want - and I have not the least faith in the average bishop to police such.

James

[James]

Finally, on Scripture Luke,

You can pick up the Bible and read any part of it any time you want.

If you want Scripture that relates to a particular issue, there are all sorts of indices which will help you with that.

The minute priests start picking and choosing what Scripture to read, many will pick and choose to further heterodox understandings and to confuse people. (The vast majority of Catholics being relatively Scripturally illiterate to begin with...)

The whole point of having a rigid way of doing things is to prevent falsehood from creeping into the Church (which it does anyway).

As for contemporary music - sure. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with such (as long as the words are theologically correct and advance the purpose of the Mass). Come to Mass in my town. We have tambourines, electric guitar and pop Christian songs on a frequent basis.

James

[Luke]

James,

It's great that you are very well educated about Catholic theology and have the confidence to question the correctness of teachings by local priests and people who've completed theology degrees. You're the sort of person who could give excellent sermons!

I think, however, you're a little too critical. Yes, there are 'good' and 'bad' theology degrees and priests. But please don't underestimate the intelligence of the average Catholic. Sure, the average Catholic is somewhat scripturally and theologically ignorant but are we not all gifted with brains and the Holy Spirit in order to guide us and to help us differentiate between truth and false teaching? Of course the Church is an integral part of this equation.

I think its dangerous to try to eradicate dissenting opinions - so long as individuals are not permitted to assert that their own opinion is superior to that of the Church. It's important that incorrect doctrines are extinguised, but we shouldn't discourage debate and alternative views.

Rigidity has carried the Church safely through many of its problems throughout the centuries but there are inherent problems too. For example, its sluggishness to adapt to a changing world, especially in our expression or manifestation of faith such as in the Mass.

[Luke]

PS. James, how do you suggest that a Catholic learn more about his faith and Church if theology degrees are an unpredictable and insufficient means? If I were to undertake wide reading of Catholic literature, I would also come across diverse opinions and theological interpretation let alone the ideas of the impugned "dissidents" or "liberals". Of course there are official Church documents from the Magisterium, Papal Encyclicals, the Catechism etc. Any suggestions?