The Rad Trad has had a very unpleasant last week or so. He combatted a nasty cold while preparing for a job interview that took place today, only to discover that the position was basically an IT job when the Rad Trad's background is in Finance! Preposterous! This Friday or Saturday there will be a post on the ascetical treatises of St. Isaac the Syrian and soon there after my [over due] review of Dr. Hull's Banished Heart.
As a quick preview of Banished Heart, I do not know what sort of reviews the work received in 1995 when the first edition was released, but the latest edition went somewhat un-noticed aside from a review in the Usus Antiquior journal. It is worth asking why the book has gone un-noticed outside of more scholarly circles while Fr. Cekada's well-researched Work of Human Hands and Michael Davies' elementary Pope Paul's New Mass continue to get traction. The Rad Trad firmly believes that most of the traditionalists of the 1970s-1990s are, or were, ultramontanists in search of Pius X and hence were wary of criticizing the Pope, Papal authority, or the actions preceding the introduction of the new liturgy (which readers of this blog hopefully realize by now was a very gradual process). An example of this attitude is a story Msgr. Fellay tells of Cardinal Journet, having read the infamous #7 of the 1970 GIRM, storming into Paul VI's office and showing the Pontiff the troublesome excerpt; the Pope then breaks down in tears, revealing that he had not read the text before signing it. This is ridiculous.
|Pope Paul VI. He knew what was going on!|
Banished Heart, thus far, tells of an over-extension of Papal authority into other liturgical traditions, both East and West, and the legalistic view of the Church that resulted from it. Anything that was not Roman was to be suspected of heterodoxy. Early in the book Dr. Hull asks questions such as "Is validity everything?" Some uber-traddies, such as sedevacantists, curtail the moral argument here by suggesting that the new liturgy is somehow invalid. Yet it is a serious question. Do a low Mass and a solemn Papal Mass with full ceremony not have different value? I think readers see where this is heading. Banished Heart does not play into the conventional narrative that Vatican II and Bugnini, a possible Mason, crept out of the shadows to destroy the liturgy and replace it with a primarily ecumenical service. Thus far my only criticism of Dr. Hull's work is that it contains no working definition for the traditional Roman liturgy which, given the book's subtitle, Origins of Heteropraxis in the Catholic Church, might be relevant.
The book presents challenging questions to Roman Catholics of all backgrounds, to Eastern Catholics, and to the Eastern Orthodox, whose separation from the Apostolic See in Rome is given a very different light than the one usually shone upon it by mad Romanists or by culturally-rooted Eastern prejudices.
Lastly, I am sorry for ignoring your comments, some of which have asked me direct questions. I will try to reply to a few of them in due course.
The Rad Trad, over and out.