Although my family and I have attended the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively for the past three years, and have no intention of changing course, I would not consider us “traditionalists” in a strict sense. Why?
For one, I simply don’t find a term like this especially useful. It tends to divide and cement the Church into factions (that people already know exist), and as our Lord says, “A house divided against itself cannot stand” (Mark 3:25). It operates by way of stereotypes and broad brush strokes and encourages tribalism, which isn’t always of benefit to our mission to “make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19). I don’t need labels, and I don’t find them helpful, so I tend not to latch on to such terms.
Need for clarity
For another thing, I am generally averse to using contemporary nomenclature because its expressions have a short half-life. They tend to be overused (and often cringe-worthy) and usually degenerate into pejoratives.
When we say, for example, that someone is “woke”, we don’t mean he is enlightened, but that he is a virtue signaler. Likewise, when we call people “rad trads”, it usually implies they lack charity and are overly zealous about the things of the past. It’s a weaponized use of language to make someone into the “other” so we can write them off.
And yet, we cherish Tradition and the traditional liturgy and want to see it grow and flourish. That is why I wonder sometimes where our Holy Father Pope Francis is coming from when he equates such love of Tradition with what he calls the “perversion” found in so-called “rigid priests”.
“Clericalism is a perversion of the priesthood: it is a perversion. And rigidity is one of the manifestations,” the pope said on June 10.
“When I find a rigid seminarian or young priest, I say ‘something bad is happening to this one on the inside.’ Behind every rigidity, there is a serious problem, because rigidity lacks humanity.”
He continued, “The world is thirsty for priests who are able to communicate the goodness of the Lord to those who have experienced sin and failure, for priests who are experts in humanity, for pastors willing to share the joys and labors of their brothers, for men who allow themselves to be changed by the cry of those who suffer.”
I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, and the Holy Father is no exception. And there is an element of truth in what he says – there is a kind of “lack in humanity” in rigidity, if we take this at face value to mean that one expects perfection sans mercy, or “ties up heavy burdens” in a Pharisaical way without giving one the means in charity to perfect themselves.
I have to assume this is the “perversion of the priesthood” (clericalism) the Holy Father speaks of. The world is indeed thirsty for priests who are able to communicate the goodness of the Lord to those who have experienced sin and failure. But is the pope being clear here? The traditional priests I know do not fall under this definition of rigidity.
Theology as Art and Science
It may be helpful to speak about the difference between art and science in this context. Theology is unique in that it is both an art and a science. As a science, Theology (“theos” meaning God, “logos” meaning study) has a subject: God, the Supreme Good, whom we can know through the revelation of Himself to us in His divine Son, Jesus Christ.
But Theology is also an art in that it attempts to explain the unexplainable and depict the goodness of God to a fallen humanity. It does this through art, literature, poetry, nature, metaphysics…really anything that can be used to reflect the goodness and nature of God. Because we are not automatons, theology seeks to answer ultimate questions (“Why are we here?” “What happens to us when we die?” “What is the purpose of life?”) in a systematic fashion while dealing with human beings as the subjects – the receivers of God’s Divine Revelation – who are rife with imperfections.
“Accompaniment” is an overused word in more progressive Catholic circles that tries to accommodate for this kind of human failing and imperfection. It is often touted as a kind of merciful antidote to this “rigidity” the Pope is so critical of. There is nothing wrong with walking with someone in the throes of sin who is not yet ready to leave that life, per se, especially when done in charity.
But here we must be careful. Any parent who has dealt with a son or daughter addicted to drugs or alcohol knows at some point the danger of enabling. This could also apply to other areas – the parents that affirm or condone their child’s decision to undergo gender reassignment therapy, or who wants to live with their boyfriend or girlfriend before marriage. When parents take a hard and uncompromising stance in these areas of morality (which pertain to one’s state of grace), and set firm boundaries in what is and isn’t acceptable, and often do so with much suffering and heaviness of heart, they are often accused by outsiders of being “hateful” or “unloving” or “rigid”.
There was another mother centuries ago who could have been accused of such rigidity. Queen Blanche of Castile, the mother of St. King Louis IX, once told her son, whom she raised to be a saint:
“I love you, my dear son, as much as a mother can love her child; but I would rather see you dead at my feet than that you should ever commit a mortal sin.”
Defining Rigidity
So again, we come back to this question – what constitutes “rigidity”? Is it adherence to the law at all costs? What if that law is the law of God, which preserves us from sin and ultimate damnation, as the Psalmist sings praise, “How can a young person stay on the path of purity? By living according to your word” (Psalm 119:9)? What if one loves the soul of another more than they love their own good name?
My wife and I do not consider ourselves “rigid” people. Our lack of a set bedtime for our kids and our house, which is in a general state of disarray, can attest to this. But we would also not hesitate to echo the words of Queen Blanche to our own children, “I would rather see you dead at my feet than that you should ever commit a mortal sin.” This is because we are not raising our children to be servants of Tradition or liturgy, but rather to cultivate the virtues for themselves that are needed to attain sanctity. It is our number one priority as Catholics, and our raison d’etre as parents who hope to attain Heaven and see our children there.
We recognize the liturgy does not save on its own but is only a means to that end. People can attend a Latin Mass their whole lives and still fail in charity on a daily basis if they never learn to “bend, not break” in how they treat their fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.
But we can never compromise when it comes to sin. We may adjust how we address a wayward brother; we may change our tone to suit our audience; we may even tolerate such conditions as long as we are persistently and gently leading one in charity towards the well that never runs dry.
Building the House of Virtue
If some priests (and laypeople) find fertile ground in Tradition for building the house of virtue, and if that, by extension, makes them targets of the threat of “rigidity”, so be it. I find that it is not, as Pope Francis said, “Something bad which is happening to this one on the inside,” but rather that they love God’s law so much that they “will the good of another,” which is the essence of charity.
For the stiff-necked and obstinate, true charity will almost always feel abrasive and superficially “unloving” because it does not condone the poison in the meal, or it rips a drowning man’s shift collar while pulling him into a life raft.
Maybe the use of these pejoratives such as “rigid” made by one’s own father are meant to be borne by those who love Tradition and God’s law as a metaphorical scourging at the pillar or crown of thorns – a kind of humiliation one endures as a means to his sanctification. Or if open-minded, he may take it as a challenge to increase the virtue of charity in his own life, even if a challenge to another doesn’t look “loving” from the outside when it is for the benefit of his flock’s souls.
Either way, if an abhorrence of sin in one’s own life and the world, and a love of God’s law and the depositum fidei handed on to us by the Apostles for the sake of our ultimate salvation is a kind of “perversion”, well, color me rigid.
37 thoughts on “What Does It Mean To Be Rigid?”
I think I understand this article. The hippy-dippy liberal Catholics are the truly loving Catholics but of course, the traditional, conservative Catholics are the judgmental, hypocritical, close-minded Catholics who care too much about sex. Anyone who adheres to the rules of the church is the Pharisee that Jesus would have condemned harshly. Any form of structure, truth, or objectivity is seen as restrictive and evil. Traditional Catholics are no fun either.
I agree with Bryan’s comment that the author appears to be blind to his own rigidity. The quote about wishing your child dead before they commit a mortal sin is troubling on many levels. I would drop dead of shock if I heard Jesus utter that quote.
I’ve heard the argument that adherents of the TLM are misunderstood, and they are not rigid. This piece starts to make the same argument, but I don’t think there is any misunderstanding. I think there is actually a fundamental disagreement about what Jesus’ will for us is.
And yet the Lord says, ““If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.” (Mt 5:29-30). Is he misspeaking? Does anyone really think one should self-mutilate at the reception of Jesus’ words after they are delivered to him? Of course not. The Lord Himself drives home the gravity of sin in this hyperbolic (not literal) manner to make the point. I interpret Queen Blanche’s words not dis-similarly. Do I ‘wish my children dead’ as one commentedr put on me? Don’t be ridiculous, and quit missing the point. The point is all the saints had an abhorance of sin to the point where they would echo her sentiments for themselves. St Teresa of Avila wrote, “If we knew how much damage one mortal sin does to the soul, we would go to the “greatest trouble imaginable” to avoid committing such a sin. “No thicker darkness” clouds the soul than mortal sin: it produces nothing but “misery and filth,” bringing “endless and eternal evils in its train.” (IC 33-34). If I recall Mother Teresa (is she rigid as well?) felt similarly. I am nowhere close to a saint, but like I said, I stand behind the hyperbole. We are not all called to be Saint X….but we are all called (and given the grace and means) to attain sanctity in order to wear the crown (but not without suffering). God bless you.
That makes me feel a little better! I did not get the idea that it was hyperbole when reading it. The doubling down on the quote made it seem very much literal.
Jesus also says “I desire mercy and not sacrifice. For I didn’t come to call the righteous, but sinners.” I’m not saying avoiding sin should not be a goal. When looking at the totality of Jesus’ ministry, it just seems that mercy and forgiveness were the main focus. Absolutely, we should take actions to avoid sin. At the same time though, our larger focus should be on loving God and loving others. As humans, we only have so much capacity and if we use it all to focus only on ourselves and avoiding our own personal sins, I see that as a misuse of God’s gifts. The rigidity that has been talked so much about is oftentimes driven by an extreme inward focus on the self. In my opinion, that is not the way Jesus called us (or designed us) to live.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. The Commandments are clear–love God, love neighbor (as Jesus distilled it into these two primary). This is our primary calling as Christians. We cannot love our neighbor if we do not love God (right order), and we are liars if we say we love God but do not love our brother, as scripture says. We need to have out ‘house in order’ of course, but not to the extent that we are blind to the need and love of our brothers and sisters. Everything flows from the love of God, but we can’t keep it to ourselves! Truth and Charity!
Hmmm, perhaps you misunderstand how seriously are the consequences of dying in mortal sin, outside a State of Grace.
The Queen understood this, so did her son, the King and saint.
I can agree with all of that. Thank you for the followup!
I love the Lord, and Tradition, in that order! That is one of the reasons we homechooled years ago. It is traditionalISM we avoid.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we all lived our Catholic with humble charity in our hearts, and it flowed into our words and actions, from all its fullness? For out of the heart the mouth speaks. Then Fr. Ripperger, Msgr Pope and others wouldn’t feel the need to publicly warn the TLM community about a lack of charity and lack of humility that continues among them. Fr. Mark Kirby, author of, “In Sinu Jesu”, might still be prior at Silverstream Priory and the SSPX might not be involved in scandal with the FBI investigation in St. Mary’s, KS.
May God bless us all with the grace to move from the darkness of public finding fault, even to the point of rash judgement, with the Church, priests, bishops, the Holy Father, and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and become the light in the darkness by taking our concerns to prayer or confession and not spreading this darkness on the internet or in our words and actions. Could it be we have lost the sense of how accountable we will be for our words and actions?
Rob,
I am glad you are aware of all of the concerns of Fr. Ripperger, he has spoken on these same problems more than once. Many of the problems he mentioned can come from the wounds in the hearts of people, like the many I have known throurgh homeschooling. The TLM does not heal these deep wounds, many from childhood, if the person is resistant to the grace of healing. The TLM does offer them some security by checking off the list of rules, but it only creates greater dysfunction. The set of rules, usually lived rigidly, does not set the heart free, and if lived with bitter zeal, it passes on to the children. Rules without relationship leads to rebellion, with God and our children.
We will not derive all of the powerful, eternal benefits and graces of the Holy Mass, TLM or NO, if our hearts are hardened, devoid of charity, zealous for God’s law, but corrupted by pride. Commitment to deep, personal prayer and devotion to Our Lady will help us begin to heal and then our hearts will be free to truly participate, interiorly, in the the Holy Mass and the prayers. Knowledge of God will allow us to know His greatness, charity and mercy, but only a deep, unconditional love of Him will help us experience these attributes, as Fr.Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen reminds us in his wonderful book, “Divine Intimacy”.
Happy Father’s Day!
What if one loves our Lord, Tradition, AND has charity in his or heart, outwardly expressed? It’s not either/or, as many would see it.
This author is rigid but like most rigid people doesn’t see it. Accompaniment is not enabling. Would you really want to see your kids dead before committing a mortal sin? That is the epitome of a rigid soul. I would rather my kids learn about God’s greatest attribute…mercy that forgives mortal sin.
The point is that we shouldn’t be committing serious sin in the first place.
It is not possible for God to have a “greatest” attribute. This is not a rigid position – it is church teaching. Guy, Texas
I’d be interested to know if since the implementation of the novus ordo, there have been any eucharistic miracles, lacrimations, eschartas, etc, at any traditional mass or parish.
I know these phenoms often occur with a doubting priest presiding, but by their sheer capacity to convert, it seems some kind of heavenly thumbs up.
Most astonishing for me was the levitating eucharist at Lourdes, with many concelebrating French priests, on youtube.
Rigid means not agreeing with Pope Francis 100% on any or every topic he talks about.
It is interesting that those attached to the Traditional Latin Mass, including priests, do not properly translate “Novus Ordo”. The proper translation is “Order of the Mass” or “Mass of the New Order”. Yet, they almost always call it the “new mass”. Why would this be, especially from people who value their knowledge of Latin? Could it be that they want to imply the Novus Ordo might be illegal or implicit? We would never want to hide our malice behind the mask of virtue. We should never want to tread on this holy ground, speaking about the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, without the purest of intent.
It is not the Holy Mass in Latin that keep many of us away and choose to attend very reverant Novus Ordo Masses, it is the culture that has been built up around it. Steve Skojec’s recent articles can attest to this. Many of us are confused with the fruits we see coming from these communities, culture and websites. Shouldn’t we see much more gratitude, humility and meekness if the TLM is the better form?
Maybe you haven’t seen this very interesting and insightful video by Fr. Ripperger.
https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=yset_chr_syc_hp&ei=UTF-8&p=Fr.+Ripperge+video+on+10+problems+with+latin+mass&type=hpsetv2Aug27#id=1&vid=d46f751cf6b92aa74468a7adbdd05c07&action=click
Here it is in print.
https://www.tumblarhouse.com/blogs/news/problems-in-the-traditionalist-movement
May God grant all Catholics whole-hearted healing, living our faith fully alive and faithfully as we seek deeper union with Him. St. John of the Cross tells us that in the end, we will be judged on love alone.
Thank you for the clarification for the audience on the usage of terms. To use a secular quote, “be the change you want to see.” We will indeed by judged on how we love.
And yes I have written for Steve in the past, so empathize with his struggles. A little Charity goes a long way. And Fr Ripperger also makes excellent points and warnings about the sin of pride (and temptation towards it). I have written about this on many topics in reference to his lectures and talks
You may be interested in this post of mine on this topic is something close to my heart
https://fatherofthefamily.blogspot.com/2019/02/tradition-and-charity-face-of-renewal.html?m=1
Does the quote from Queen Blanche leave any room for hope? It seems a little dark to me.
I have nothing but hope (the hope of King David, St Paul, St Mary Magdalene, and others)What struck me about her words was the reality of the gravity of sin that we seem to have forgotten. Even Our Lord said we should cut off our hand or gouge out our eye rather than sin to accentuate this gravity. I think Queen Blanche recognizes this and is driving it home to her children in blunt fashion to make the point
Rob I liked your article and it is timely as I have asked the same question each time I hear the Holy Father talk about “rigidity”. As a person who admittedly likes the Novus Ordo mass I appreciate your remarks and not trying to condemn all of those who don’t attend Traditional Mass as some sort of heretic.
With regards to rigidity, it would be nice if he cited examples of it instead of throwing it out there in the same fashion that “systemic racism” is used without any real examples. Just that it is really bad and it is everywhere.
You make a great point about the ambiguity. I suspect maybe it is just the Holy Father’s nature not to define things (the “off the cuff” remarks in interviews seem to attest to this, and perhaps his theology as a Jesuit which abets this) and this can leave many people frustrated (myself included). This was basically how I was formed in the Church during my first ten years or so as a Catholic, and eventually, it just doesn’t cut the mustard anymore (and in my case, at least, can lead you into mortal sin when what is truly right and wrong is not clearly defined). This is not legalism, but like a child hungry for boundaries. I guess many traditionalists just feel like “hungry children” a lot of times, and will go looking for the food where they can find it.
The unfortunate thing is in a time when there is such a lack of clear teaching and understanding on basic moral teachings in the culture, this approach ends up just being more “white noise” so to speak–it can mean everything, or nothing at all, because it is not clearly defined and rests in a more general painting of things. I think another unfortunate result of this is that those who are more traditionally minded may become frustrated to the point of being so hungry for it that they do a “hard right turn” maybe more than is warranted–I think sedevacantists fall prey to this, as do those “looking for answers” in the chaos (maybe seeking out in things like Q-Anon, etc).
With regards to the TLM–not all people will take to it. But I also think many people don’t give it a chance, or may write it off due to interactions with uncharitable trads and their outlook colored by that, so I try to at least let people know it IS in fact an option (one that is being rumored to be restricted by the Vatican, for reasons that leave one guessing). Or maybe they have a more charismatic disposition. To each their own. Personally, we have been very blessed by it, but we have also known many wonderful people who attend the N.O. and I also had some good (and some not so good) experiences attending the N.O. for 90% of my Catholic life. I kind of liken it to our Lord saying when the disciples ask him where he is going, and he simply tells them, “Come and see” (Jn 1:39)
Pingback: VVEEKEND EDITION – Big Pulpit
I think I may have misunderstood something. Would you personally prefer to see your child dead than see them commit a mortal sin? That’s the way I read it, and if I’m correct, I’m terrified.
There is no room for hope in that quote. No hope for repentance, and no hope for God’s mercy. Using that logic, abortion could almost be defined as a good thing because it would prevent your child from committing a mortal sin. We all make mistakes, and our kids will too. If this quote is being portrayed as good and noble, I think there is a major problem somewhere. I think it is probably related to what Pope Francis calls rigidity. The rules are there, but no one will follow all of them all the time. The focus – like Jesus’ focus – needs to be a little more on love and forgiveness. And I think this is part of the point Francis is trying to make. Prevention is important, but you can’t look at everything as a loss when prevention fails. St. Augustine’s mother never lost hope, and I’m pretty sure she never wished her son dead while he was living the wild life.
Thank you Rob, for a fine article! I can think of only one apposite quote: “In my Father’s house, there are many mansions.” (John 14:2, DRA)
I always liked that passage from scripture. Thanks.
I do not attend the tridentine mass. But in my experience, the people who do are some of the best Christians I’ve ever seen. I think it’s a shame that the novus ordum Catholics constantly find ways to criricise trads. In fact, it seems to me that they are the real rigid ones, lacking in charity.
We have met nothing but kind and charitable people at our diocesan TLM. It was in fact a large family of 11 that invited us out to eat after our first Mass in the Extraordinary Form, and others who befriended us, that helped lubricate the transition. I think the mark of a Christian is love and charity, and that there are “bad apples” in all bushels. The one thing I have found with those who intentionally seek out and attend the TLM is that they are there because they truly “believe this stuff” (as opposed to cultural Catholics who you typically dont’ find at the TLM, who may just be there on Sunday Mass (praise God) and not know why, or may not be living by the Church’s teaching or even disagree with it).
One very apparent thing I noticed is with our children when they attend the TLM. There is no doubt something sacred and reverent is going on during the liturgy; our kids behavior at the N.O. was not the best, so when we started to attend the TLM, I was self conscious, but they really fell into line almost without us even doing anything different. All the other kids too. It was odd. It could be the parents, but really if you attend a TLM you will notice the parents aren’t really doing much with the kids to make them that way–I tend to think there is somethign about the Mass that awes, even children, and communicates that God is present beyond a doubt and that something reverent and holy is taking place. It was a pleasant and unexpected byproduct of attending the traditional liturgy that this happened, but it always kind of stuck with me. We all need charity!
Rigidity is as common as sin. It manifests itself in humanity’s timeless trait to fear, avoid, maladapt to change. Be it nostalgia or stubborn insistence that the old ways worked best is an affliction for certain types who fear the future. My parents didn’t have a checking account until well into their 60’s because of something that happened in 1929. And though the shenanigans of 2008 lend credence to the artificial risk of banking, the world wide system tends to be sound; and this, at the time when paper and coin currency are poised for extinction. So too the CC is set to embark upon theological waters that will take it into a future that will chill those still clinging to traditions not necessarily relevant. Pope Francis’ wrenching views are a reflection of what has already befallen the church as seventy-five percent have jumped ship. And so he refitted Peter’s barque 1, rechristened it the Peter 2. The overwhelming majority of baptized, confirmed Catholics who no longer physically participate in the parish community have left the twenty percent who remain, ghostly as the ruins of the acropolis. Francis is sailing this ship on a rescue mission, not so much to save souls as to understand why they left in the first place, bring them back on board by adjusting the sails to a new course; to catch this Pentecostal wind that blows where it wishes.
“Not so much to save souls as to understand why they left in the first place…”
Forgive me, but if this is true is the Church really holding her mission that “all men may be saved…Salvation exists in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)?
“..for there is no other name under heaven given by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)?
Rob, having been educated by two orders of nuns, the first 8 years ( mid 50’s to early 60’s ) under the auspices of Jesuit theology, I was taught that only Catholics go to heaven. Then Vat 2 came along and greatly dispelled the “only” notion. Acts was written by men who immediately began to quarrel; rigid men who were better adapted to form rules than understand God’s mysterious ways. Salvation is open to anyone who loves God and neighbor no matter what creed they profess. You should be able to intuit this without doubt or confusion. I don’t agree with the pope trying to squash TLM but understand where human pride could split an already sundered institution even further. Those many millions who started swimming against (or with a new) tide have their work cut out for them but but Peter’s boat has steered to follow, pick them up if need be, all the while understanding – as we were fervently taught – that THEY are the church too.
Hi Rob, perhaps you saw today’s news about the French Catholic Archdiocese Expelling the FSSP? I think this is a good example for discussion. I don’t pretend to know all the details, but I can only speculate that this gets to the point:
It sounds to me that the FSSP is “excommunicating” themselves from communion with the Church by rejecting the Bishop. The Bishop is shepherd of the flock, whether you are Jew or Muslim, he is still your Bishop simply by living within his Diocese. Like it or not. Yet the FSSP sounds like they are telling him that “they make the rules”. It doesn’t work like that.
Saint Ignatius of Antioch said, “we should look upon the bishop even as we would upon the Lord Himself” in his Epistle to the Ephesians. Nothing has changed since then.
The Bishop invited the FSSP to participate in the Chrism Mass which is normal, however the FSSP seem to refuse to bend one inch, so … where their Holy Oil comes from, I don’t know…
I know you agree with me that “excommunicating” oneself from communion with the Church is like saying “non serviam”. I don’t have a problem with the TLM, but I think this situation in France reflects on the “rigidity” issue that the Pope is trying to communicate.
I don’t claim to know the whole back story of this instance, but from the NC Register article at least, from the FSSP’s perspective, there is another issue here as well to provide the ‘other side’ to this story:
“He wanted to concelebrate for the Chrism Mass during Holy Week, but we haven’t done it for years, as we have reservations on the New Mass and we don’t celebrate at the same pace,” Father Perrel said.
The priest emphasized that Canon 902 of the Code of Canon Law provides that no one can be forced to concelebrate.
“The archbishop had first accepted it, although he didn’t like it, but now he is kicking us out for this motive, and he is abusing his authority in this sense,” Father Perrel suggested.
I am not a priest, so don’t have these issues, and wrote this article as a layman not to lampoon the Holy Father, but to try to get to the heart of what it means to be ‘rigid,’ whether lay or cleric. We can be ‘rigid’ as lay people as well when we fail in charity towards our brother, as St. Paul writes about in 1 Cor 8:13 in “bending, not breaking” as I made mention in the article, which also involves the conscience, which can vary from person to person even in the same circumstances.
We need balance, but these types of decisions in the instance (with reference to the FSSP) seems to be a ‘line in the sand’ when certain decisions must be made. I would not want to be the one making them, but then again I am not a cleric, just a husband and father with different decisions to make for my the spiritual health of my family.
During a concelebration (of a valid and licit “New [Chrism] Mass”), the celebrant is obviously the Bishop. This past Holy Week, I watched it online. One of the readings was in Spanish. I recall something was sung in Latin by a woman with the voice of an angel. Then, during the Liturgy of the Eucharist, multiple priest and Bishops (and maybe an Abbot) participated by surrounding the Altar and reciting a few lines. I don’t remember, but maybe something as simple as, “The Mystery of Faith:”
So according to Father Perrel, he can’t be FORCED to do this. Which is true enough, but don’t you think it sounds a little deceptive that he CAN’T say ONE prayer – in Latin – fine, even facing east – during a valid, licit “New Mass” which only takes place once per year?
Like I said, I have nothing against the TLM, and you have previously promoted it nobly, but I think this particular group of FSSP sound to be desperate for citing Canon Law 902.
Faith comes from hearing the word of God where it tells us that Christianity is not a religion of observing rules and regulations in order to be righteous (see Galatians 5:4, 18 and Colossians 2:20-22). If rigidity implies this, then I can understand what it means. If it is used in other ways, I’m not sure what it means.
Because the Catholic Church imposes religious obligations such as mass on Sunday, rigidity must mean something else when it is used by Pope Francis: or does it? There is a spiritual discernment that is only for those with the Holy Spirit which is called the mind of Christ (see 1Corinthians 2:9-16 and 1John 2:20, 27). This is what replaces religious legalism in Christianity.
Excellent article, Rob. When the pope critiques rigidity he should explain himself. Is he criticising those who hold firmly to the faith or is he talking about some sort of personality disorder? I think he is criticising those who are faithful to church teaching given his well known support for those in irregular marriages, who, he claims, should be accompanied and allowed, as part of that accompaniment, to receive Holy Communion. In my view, the pope sees absolute loyalty to the faith as problematic. Sadly, under this pope, doctrinal confusion has become a massive problem.