I guess I’m a little slow, but finally, after lo, these many
years, I have figured out why priests and bishops so often fail to answer my
letters.
I’ve written plenty of letters about liturgical problems –
especially blatant abuses that ignore clear instruction and direction from
various Church documents. I have received precious few responses, and those I
did receive ranged from petulant whining to vague dismissal. Why?
It’s not that my letters were rude rants with no solid
ground for complaint. I have always endeavored (and succeeded, for the most
part, I think) in being respectful, and laying out my objections in a
reasonable and logical fashion, citing Church documents to show that I’m not
arguing for my own opinion, but for what is clearly the mind of the Church.
So why the silence from the powers-that-be?
Well…duh! If they were to respond, and if they had an ounce
of intellectual honesty, their letters would have to say something along these
lines:
Dear Dr. Boyd[1]:
You are correct in your reading
of Documents X, Y, and Z. The liturgical anomalies you have noted and brought
to our attention are indeed problematic, and should be corrected.
However, we choose simply to
ignore the abuse, because that’s the way we’ve always done it. Even if the
Church says otherwise, we want to continue doing it our way.
Thank you for your concern. Now
please sit down and shut up.
Sincerely
Bishop Benign and Fr. Flapdoodle
Well! What self-respecting prelate or priest would want to
admit that in writing!
Besides, even if they did respond, and even if they did make
the correction in liturgical practice, there would be 99 people to my 1
complaining about the change in “how we’ve always done it”.
And if there’s one thing bishops and priests seem to be
obsessed with, it’s numbers – as in, “We can’t possibly provide the
extraordinary form of the Mass, because there are just not enough people
interested.” (Of course, the plummeting numbers of Catholics attending Sunday Mass every Sunday isn't discussed...) And then there’s the overgeneralization – when any hint of
orthodoxy is implemented, that “ so many people have complained”. (I
have figured out that when the number of people asking for the EF Mass is, say,
3, that is considered “too few”; but when people are complaining about
correcting a liturgical abuse that they are attached to, the number “3” is
considered “so many”.)
The underlying fear, of course, is that “They will stop
giving their money.”
Ha! The pastors of the parishes I’ve been affiliated didn’t
even know how much money my husband and I were giving in the weekly collection;
even if they had known, I somehow doubt they would have chased us down as we
walked out the door, begging us to come back with our $$$ and promising to do
whatever we wanted.
And the whole numbers game is so contrary to the examples we
see in Scripture! There was Abraham, for instance, arguing with God (Genesis
18:23-32) about the imminent destruction of Sodom: “Will you save the city for
the sake of 50 righteous people? Yes? Okay, how about for 40? Yes? Then how
about for 20? For 10?” God did not ever say, “No, sorry, there just aren’t
enough of you.”
And of course a glaring example from the Gospels is the Good
Shepherd pursuing the one lost sheep while leaving the 99 to their own devices
for a time. The Good Shepherd did not say, “Well…if there were more than just a
handful straying away, I’d go after them, but since it’s only one…”
In actual fact, it is the 99 who are lost when liturgical
abuses distort the theology of the Mass and undermine the faith of the souls
attending. The “one” is on the right track, but many of those who have a
correct understanding of the liturgy and the desire to see the worship of God
carried out correctly and reverently are becoming lost in the sense that they
are losing faith in their “shepherds” because those shepherds are turning out
to be wolves in sheeps’ clothing.
It’s pretty clear to me at this point that letters aren’t
going to accomplish much in my diocese. I think it’s time for a different
tactic. I think it’s time to create a local group that sponsors talks about the
faith in a secular setting (a room at the local library). Let the faithful of
the parish attend if they like, but seek to convert others to Catholicism –
bring in a whole new crop of Catholics that has a foundation in the critical
moral issues of our time, as well as an appreciation of Tradition and the
meaning of the Mass.
That’s where I’m heading in the new year.
Perhaps I’ll start with a pro-life presentation to commemorate the anniversary of Roe v Wade, entitled, “Where Do We Go from Here? Abortion, Contraception, and Catholic Moral Teaching”. Would anyone come? Frankly, it’s doubtful in this community. But it’s worth a try.
[1] By the
way, I’ve yet to have a bishop address me as “Dr. Boyd”; I thank you readers
who have addressed me as such out of respect for the tons of bucks and the years of toil I spent to
earn that darn degree. I’m not at all attached to being called “Dr.”, as I have
made clear to those of you who used that title, but it’s always nice to be
acknowledged in that way.
