Reforms have enhanced our faith

A reader’s letter came in this week that I normally would have rejected instantly.

While we do run letters that are controversial in nature in keeping with our goal to promote an open dialogue, this new arrival went well beyond any measure of suitability that we have established for this forum.

Self-titled "An old man rebels," the letter criticizes many of the liturgical changes that have been implemented in the Church after the Second Vatican Council. The writer, whose name I will not divulge, declared that he will not abide by some of the Church’s rules, and encouraged other Catholics to do the same.

Because this is a diocesan newspaper, and therefore a communications instrument of the Church itself, we would not be in the business of giving space to those who would so disrespect this community of believers as to condemn just about every liturgical reform that has taken place in the last 40 years. But because this letter offers insight into precisely why our Church leaders establish norms and seek to update the liturgy, I am addressing it in this column.

Our rebellious "old man" writes:

It is ironic that this week’s issue reports on the recently-held conference marking the 40th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council’s document on the Liturgy, in which many of the changes our letter writer so vehemently opposes are rooted. One speaker at the conference, Claretian Father Matias Auge, addressed the very complaint raised by our letter writer. As reported by Catholic News Service, Father Auge told conference participants that the Church faces the challenge of balancing an individual’s need for a sense of devotion with the Liturgy’s role as the prayer of a believing community.

Father Auge cautioned against giving in to an attitude that Liturgy should be "a strictly individual and purely private affair."

The post-conciliar liturgical reforms sought to bring us all into the loop, so to speak. The council fathers wanted to establish a sense of community as the body of Christ, and to enhance both our understanding and participation in the Mass.

There have been abuses by some who have failed to recognize the reverence and solemnity of the Mass. But there are also those who have abused the reforms by ignoring them – by refusing to extend a sign of peace to their fellow parishioners; by not participating at all in the Mass and opting to say the Rosary for the full hour instead, and by holding on to certain ritualistic practices which are now not accepted by the Church.

Where is the tradition in that?