Sunday, July 8
A Clarification
The point of my speculations about allowable possibilities in the implementation of the motu proprio (in which, in retrospect, I should also have discussed the possibilities of the dialogue Mass) is not to carry out a syncretism or "tampering" as I have been accused of. Rather, it is to think aloud about the kind of pastoral approach that can allow there to be the most possible "extraordinary" Masses under the current set of circumstances. I really don't see how anything I proposed should really gives scandal to anyone except for traditionalists who already take a rather purist approach to the Tridentine Rite and who presumably can find a celebration that conforms to such an approach (as indeed most of those currently in place do).
I also want to make clear that I am very much in favor of a very wide application of this motu proprio, but that in order to do so I think it makes sense to allow legitimate pastoral flexibility to make this available and plausible in a variety of contexts. What is and is not allowable in this regard is unclear to me and to others, and thus it makes sense to keep the conversation going. It is also true that part of the point of this blog is to speculate and start conversation, especially when we have a more than 2 month window to clarify what is and is not permissible in implementation. I would appreciate, then, that we continue (as most of us have) to have a thoughtful conversation and not become irate at the fact that we are even considering such things. It seems to me that the whole point of the 2 month window is precisely to allow such conversations, as well as practical planning, to take place, and no one should feel threatened by it.
I also want to make clear that I am very much in favor of a very wide application of this motu proprio, but that in order to do so I think it makes sense to allow legitimate pastoral flexibility to make this available and plausible in a variety of contexts. What is and is not allowable in this regard is unclear to me and to others, and thus it makes sense to keep the conversation going. It is also true that part of the point of this blog is to speculate and start conversation, especially when we have a more than 2 month window to clarify what is and is not permissible in implementation. I would appreciate, then, that we continue (as most of us have) to have a thoughtful conversation and not become irate at the fact that we are even considering such things. It seems to me that the whole point of the 2 month window is precisely to allow such conversations, as well as practical planning, to take place, and no one should feel threatened by it.
![[SMMMHDH]](http://www.mgilleland.com/music/smmmhdh.png){kind=small}
