Liturgical history Apr 12, 2012 15:19:36 GMT
Post by Beinidict Ó Niaidh on Apr 12, 2012 15:19:36 GMT
I read this piece and all the comments. My favourite was
This particular kind of Traditionalists would have condemned St. John the Baptist for his dress probably even asking him to wear a suit and tie for the Holy Baptism of Our Lord, they would have stoned Saint Mary Magdalene, would have burned Joan of Arc at the stake for wearing armour and cutting her hair, and would have accused Blessed Hildegard Von Bingen as a sorceress or new ager for healing with herbs, for her musical compositions, and for writing books as well condemning her for the man buried in Rupertsburg whom the clergy of Mainz wanted to remove from sacred ground because he had died after excommunication from the Church. Something Blessed Hidegard oppossed by "replying that it was a sin and that the man had been reconciled to the church at the time of his death"
The remark I'll make is that many commenters managed to both miss Fr Gaud's point and prove it at the same time. Fr Gaud affirmed modesty - he condemned the obsession with modesty. Good Lord, if we are fortunate to experience the resurrection of the body to glory, modesty won't be an issue as everybody, including Our Blessed Lord and Our Blessed Lady will be as naked as the Heavenly Father saw it fit to create us. To echo and reinforce the comment above, St Joan of Arc and St Mary of Egypt would be numbered among the greatest of sinners - one for wearing men's clothes (in the end, for her own protection) and the other for wearing none at all.
If historical precedent is important - I notice that the tradition of segregating men and women in church, which prevaded in Ireland until very recently (I experienced it in rural Ireland not very long ago) is absent. It seems that they are taken up with matters relevant to them. Fr Gaud also raises the matter of politics - more than just off-the-wall conspiracy theories - at TLM (and this is applicable to diocesan EF Masses, the Institute and FSSP etc too). This got less credit, though it deserved as much, so the dress code is a particularly sensitive issue there. However, some comments go beyond this - bringing in topics that Fr Gaud never mentioned - homeschooling, for example.
Right here we are talking about something in broader traditionalism, something I think Alaisdir may have mentioned earlier citing an American trad - Ghetto vs leaven traditionalism. Fr Gaud, with New Catholic and many others, are leaven trads whereas his critics are happy in the ghetto, behind walls. This is much broader than the SSPX vs Ecclesia Dei divide - to me, Fr Gaud, and other SSPX priests like him, are onside, but any diocesan/FSSP/ICR priest on the other side is best avoided. If traditional liturgy and spirituality is not evangelical, then the only purpose is to reassert pharisaism. This is definitely not what Archbishop LeFebvre was about, but Dickie Williamson (not uniquely) is of this school.