Readers: is there anything you particularly enjoying reading on this blog? Anything you would like covered? Anything you would like done differently? Any stylistic recommendations?
Your effort is very commendable indeed - striking a perfect balance between extremes. I particularly liked your series on the different brands of sedevacantism and different types of catholics. Please do continue to post on the liturgy, on the beauty of our traditional Roman Rite, on the symbolism of its constitutive elements, and so forth. I wish you all the very best.
Dear Rad Trad. I truly value your opinions and I like everything about his Blog as it is now constituted.
I would like to read you delve a bit deeper into the Mass and write about whether or not there has always been only one Mass for these captious times, quarrels, and claims, have confused many to the point where it seems to be an accepted fact that there are really many different Mass rather than one mass of all time in its many different forms throughout ecclesiastical history.
Would you agree, say, that the Mass celebrated by Pope Saint Peter is the same Mass celebrated by Pope Francis?
I enjoy everything you write. I do, though, have a particular interest in the beginnings of "traditionalism" in the 1960's and 1970's. I realize you're probably more interested in what's going on currently (i.e., in re traditionalists, et al.), but I have learned some very interesting things from your posts on the early Lefebvre years, the beginnings of Sedevacantism, and so forth. Nevertheless, it's all good to go, as we say in the military. Ad multos annos! Fr. Capreolus
I really enjoy your blog. Thank you for publishing it!
I would like to read a post about why you frequent a Byzantine parish if you have such an affinity to tradition and the Tridentine liturgy.
The third-person narrative can come across as juvenile at time - which is in contrast to your deep thoughts and reflections. I fear that this stylistic element might turn some readers off from returning or subscribing.
I'm interested in your analysis of specific movements within Traditionalism, specifically sedevacantism, SSPX, and the Ecclesia Dei communities.
Other successful blogs with a similar theme include a lot of original photos; you might consider that.
Thank you for your contribution to the wider conversation.
Another idea I had, circling back to our old discussion on the Institution Narrative and the rite of Addai and Mari: is liturgical tradition prior to theological truth, or theological truth to liturgical tradition? Not only which is prior, but which is the cause of the other? Is it true because of tradition, or is in tradition because it is true? This question troubles me much, especially having taken your suggestion and read a bit of Gregory Dix on the various theologies of the Consecration. I think you have written some about this before, but I wonder if you had further thoughts about the purely philosophical problem of truth being determined by history - e.g. the different paths of liturgical development determining the truth about the moment of transubstantiation.
Perhaps your thoughts on the concept of tradition and why it is so important to the liturgy?
ReplyDeleteDear Rad Trad,
ReplyDeleteYour effort is very commendable indeed - striking a perfect balance between extremes. I particularly liked your series on the different brands of sedevacantism and different types of catholics. Please do continue to post on the liturgy, on the beauty of our traditional Roman Rite, on the symbolism of its constitutive elements, and so forth. I wish you all the very best.
Francis Arabin
Dear Rad Trad. I truly value your opinions and I like everything about his Blog as it is now constituted.
ReplyDeleteI would like to read you delve a bit deeper into the Mass and write about whether or not there has always been only one Mass for these captious times, quarrels, and claims, have confused many to the point where it seems to be an accepted fact that there are really many different Mass rather than one mass of all time in its many different forms throughout ecclesiastical history.
Would you agree, say, that the Mass celebrated by Pope Saint Peter is the same Mass celebrated by Pope Francis?
Thank you for all of your work.
I enjoy everything you write. I do, though, have a particular interest in the beginnings of "traditionalism" in the 1960's and 1970's. I realize you're probably more interested in what's going on currently (i.e., in re traditionalists, et al.), but I have learned some very interesting things from your posts on the early Lefebvre years, the beginnings of Sedevacantism, and so forth. Nevertheless, it's all good to go, as we say in the military. Ad multos annos!
ReplyDeleteFr. Capreolus
I really enjoy your blog. Thank you for publishing it!
ReplyDeleteI would like to read a post about why you frequent a Byzantine parish if you have such an affinity to tradition and the Tridentine liturgy.
The third-person narrative can come across as juvenile at time - which is in contrast to your deep thoughts and reflections. I fear that this stylistic element might turn some readers off from returning or subscribing.
I'm interested in your analysis of specific movements within Traditionalism, specifically sedevacantism, SSPX, and the Ecclesia Dei communities.
Other successful blogs with a similar theme include a lot of original photos; you might consider that.
Thank you for your contribution to the wider conversation.
I'd like to read more on the "authenticity" of the Mass. One hears that the old rite is more authentic, but then the concept is not fleshed out.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you could do a comparison between the Requiem Masses (OF & EF)?
ReplyDeleteAnother idea I had, circling back to our old discussion on the Institution Narrative and the rite of Addai and Mari: is liturgical tradition prior to theological truth, or theological truth to liturgical tradition? Not only which is prior, but which is the cause of the other? Is it true because of tradition, or is in tradition because it is true? This question troubles me much, especially having taken your suggestion and read a bit of Gregory Dix on the various theologies of the Consecration. I think you have written some about this before, but I wonder if you had further thoughts about the purely philosophical problem of truth being determined by history - e.g. the different paths of liturgical development determining the truth about the moment of transubstantiation.
ReplyDelete