Thanks for the comments taking me to task on my characterizations of some conservatives. Over the past few years, I’ve been especially careful in my criticism of ideologies within the Church. You can pretty much read what I write as what I mean–no more, no less.
I’m far from the belief that all liberals are good and all conservatives are bad. That would be just silly.
Within the greater Church, there is a spectrum of people who love and/or know the liturgy: from deeply to fairly shallow. Along that line, there are also people who have what I would consider a conservative worldview, and others more progressive. With varying degrees of shading between, there are liberals who are pretty ignorant about liturgy, conservatives who have a refined and intelligent view of it, progressives devoted and knowledgeable, and alas, liturgically-ignorant conservatives.
Double alas that many people in liturgical power in the Catholic Church are in that fourth category. Certainly the meddlers of the English interpretation of MR3. The CDWDS. Probably the pope. I don’t think there’s a malicious intent with these people. I think they mean well for the good of the Church. I also happen to think that liturgically-ignorant liberals mean well too, by and large.
Having more number twos in play would be an improvement. The full spectrum between two and three would be ideal.
Now, a warning about all this. Categories are helpful to a limited extent. They operate in the larger realms of sociology. They will often fail when dealing with individuals. Individuals, I’ve found, will surprise with a broader spread among ideology, devotion, knowledge, attitudes, and opinions. When I correspond with individuals I’ve encountered on the internet, I’m a lot more careful to the nuances they bring to a dialogue.
But on the other hand, I won’t shy away from characterizing the Liturgiam Authenticam movement as being more ignorant of liturgy, and far removed from three important aspects of liturgy: beauty, pastoral ministry, and scholarship. Then you top it all off with bureaucratic nincompoopery and its a recipe for disaster. Except that pastors and liturgists will be pulling this puppy from the jaws of defeat. Eventually.
If the bishop in question at that last link thinks we might be pushing implementation off to 2012, we’ll have a fine example of catholicity in the English-speaking world. Tourists beware.
- South Africa began their implementation in 2008.
- New Zealand is set for 2010, and even has MR3 translated into Maori, which is a fine trick to be managed.
- On New Year’s Day 2011, you can sing the new Mass settings in Australia, but everything else gets phased in through the year.
- Then the US in 2011 or 2012, supposedly.
Advocates for uniformity have to be dropping their pom-poms to grit their teeth on this, don’t you think?