Peter Kwasniewski addresses the strange and abuse-enabling trope I've confronted often, that we should attend and even seek out liturgically troublesome Masses on the theory that in doing so, we participate in the sufferings of Our Lord.
Best pull quote: "let’s not make spiritual sadomasochism into a virtue"!
Well meaning people often lapse into the fallacy Peter Kwasniewski addresses here. (Another example, that I have heard argued without irony: The evils of socialism resulted in a flourishing of faith and fervor, therefore we should seek a socialist form of government.)
Fundamentally, the fallacy is to forget that grace builds on nature and does not replace it. Our duty is to order everything to the heavenly good. And it is a duty, repeated often in Scripture, denied by those who have fallen into gnosticism. This error is enabled and amplified by the theology behind the Mass of Paul VI, that somehow the Mass is a sort of Last-Supper-ish play. Thinking that bad liturgy can somehow be good for us ends in holding something along the lines of "we must deny Christ to follow Christ." Make no mistake, this is a position found in the writings of Fr. James Martin SJ and other darlings of the current leadership, alas, of our Church.
The Mass is mystical worship, we do participate in the actual sacrifice of Calvary as it is re-presented, in an unbloody manner, at the altar; and thus we do try to unite ourselves with the sufferings of Our Lord. But mysticism does not have anything to do with making bad actions into virtues that require our assent. And make no mistake -- intentional participation in such things is assent.
What if one lives quite rurally and doesn't have many options? There are areas of the Midwest and elsewhere where a Latin Mass is scarcely found...
ReplyDeleteI totally understand and all I can say is that we have to do our best. Find the best one and go to that one!
DeleteYes, it's like telling a woman to seek out a mean, selfish man to be married to, on the theory that this will greatly aid her sanctification. Well, maybe, but the more likely scenario is that marrying a mean, selfish man will make her dislike him, dislike her life, and be hampered in her ability to carry out her duties of state in life. Why do it if you don't have to? Why poke yourself in the eye with a sharp stick?
ReplyDeleteWow what a disturbing view. I am a Protestant and live in Denmark, so I am coming from quite a different angle from you, but this reminds me oddly of an infuriating argument that was historically made in favour of believers in Denmark staying members of a weak, liberal, state church. The argument was that even though believers leaving the state church would be better for them as believers and result in a healthier church, having some true believers in the state church would be better for Danish society as a whole, and thus Danish believers should sacrifice their own spiritual welfare for the common good. This seems to me a similarly perverted kind of idea.
ReplyDelete