Thursday, March 11, 2010

Zmirak v. Hoopes on the changes in the Roman Rite

Fr. Z: Zmirak responds to Hoopes, Fr. Z does Liturgy Science Theatre 3000

John Zmirak's original article. The response by Tom Hoopes. Mr. Zmirak's rejoinder.

While I read through Fr. Z's fisking, the first thought that came to my mind was, "Is this really surprising for a Legionary publication? The sort of ultra-orthodox, ultra-montanist defense that the LCs pride themselves on?" The second thought was, "Isn't this also characteristic of a certain LC mindset which attempts to defend the order by depicting the Church according to one extreme or another, as it fits the circumstances?" See Life After RC for examples.

Mr. Zmirak may have painted too rosy a picture of the pre-Vatican II Church. Then Mr. Hoopes should have addressed this part of the argument. However, even if there was a need for liturgical reform (and I tend to think that this was the case), this does not mean that everything was handled prudently, or that the introduction of a new missal, discontinuous from the previous missal in so many ways, was a necessary component of the reform.

Fr. Z's previous post on the debate: A little debate about the Extraordinary Form in the blogs

No comments: