Fr. Jonathan

Yes, I get that they see them that way. My point is more that the critique of the implementation of Vatican II isn't some fringe idea. It comes largely from people who were at the Council, heavily influenced by it, or in positions where they worked to implement it themselves.

It's more complicated than just "the Council was highjacked," but there is a very clear disconnect between what the Council wrote and what many people on the ground did with it, especially in the west. Many who champion reform of the reforms are the very same people he cites (JPII, Benedict, etc).

Hopefully someone smart offered to tell you what He is not instead.

That is truly heartbreaking.

So what I hear you saying is... people need to get their ashes in church.

Thanks. Also, good grief.

Where is this video? I can't find it.

Wings released "Band on the Run" in 1973. The title was a pun on the phrase "man on the run," giving it new meaning as Paul McCartney tried to find his voice in a new era. And now, five decades later, a documentary makes the original phrase a pun on the pun that Paul made.

In this essay, I will

This is my Olympics.

This is me once again ready to beat these people over the head with a copy of Theology of the Body that they have never read because something something Christopher West.

Man, the Welsh can't get respect anywhere, can they.

I'm the least country person possible. I think cowboy hats should explode on contact. Bob Wills is still the king.

LOL 😆 🤣 😂

Integralists, take note.

Raising never-before-asked important theological questions, such as, "How do I follow Jesus' command to love my enemies when I have programmed them myself? Does that mean the one I really need to love is... me?"

okay maybe he's cooking here. What if instead of AI friends and AI mentors and AI hookers and AI confessors what we really need are AI-generated enemies.

SCALABLE making up a guy to get mad at

making up a guy to get mad at AS A SERVICE

I am curious to see the AI prompt they wrote that created this image for them. Because this is genuinely hilarious to me.

In any event, we can't go back to pre Vatican II practices now without it being just as personalized and reductive as anything that has come since. Better to work towards a universal improvement in how we celebrate the Mass we have than trying to reinvent what might have come before.

I think a lot of that is determined more by attitude than anything else. What you see as a bad experiment in gutting the heart of an old house, I see as a difficult but vital restoration project that has revealed hidden gems in the wood floors under the gaudy tile, etc.

We will not agree on that, alas. I think the gesimas undermined the practice of Lent, and their "recovery" in certain quarters always strikes me as a bit faux.

Yes, which makes your analogy interesting, because the same impulse that led the council to reform the Latin rite for the sake of resourcement also led them to encourage the Eastern churches to roll back latinization.

I also just find on the whole the reforms to be good, salutary, and (mostly) necessary, which perhaps makes me sometimes impatient with what often appears to me to be trad larping.

I see. I'll have to sit with that a bit. It's hard to judge because I have a lifetime of tradition experiencing the Mass as it is, and those traditions shape me and matter to me. And I think it's hard to reach back and try to imagine the way it felt in 1970 to those of us who weren't there.

Moreover they were in large measure changes that were rooted in an attempt to recover lost practices. Some could perhaps swing back the other way as the dust settles (and some have). But I don't see why it has to be characterized as a fundamental break in the way that, for example, the 1552 BCP was.

We could argue about how good or bad each of those changes is, but that wasn't really what I was asking. Yes, there were a lot of changes all at once. But they were changes in degree, not in kind. The liturgy didn't, for example, eliminate transubstantiation or mariology.

I mean of course beyond obvious differences - the vernacular, the reduction of repetition, the return of OT readings and mandatory homilies, etc.

I agree with most of the first part of this, especially a la Ratzinger about the nature of liturgical development. What I don't understand is why the current form of the Mass is by necessity a rupture with that. Fundamentally, how is it different at its core?

We are made of love God is creating you right now

Love itself is literally loving you into being right this second. If that doesn't knock your socks off, I submit to you that you may have your socks on way too tight.

No, Audible, if I'm looking up An Introduction to the Devout and Holy Life by St. Francis de Sales, "more from this genre" absofrickinglutely does not include Eckhart Tolle.

Soundtrack from today's class on prudence and temperance in order:

The Beatles - Dear Prudence
Andy Grammer - Honey I'm Good
Cookie Monster's version of I Don't Care by Charli XCX
Frankie Goes to Hollywood - Relax

My students think I'm weird. And you know what? They're right.