Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Understanding the Roman Law

This post won't make any sense unless you read Jeff Pinyan's post first. I'm responding to help clarify a few things for him that I think he missed.

Dear Jeff,

I just figured out your mistake. You're reading the priest's letter as "English Law" whereas he wrote it under the "Roman Law".

Let me explain. See, letters written in the spirit of the "Roman Law" are ideals...fantasies... we don't actually expect to reach them (and we shouldn't try). Letters written in the spirit of the "English law" are read with hard hearts - Pharisaic readings with hyper-literal interpretations..

Well Jeff, this is the real world and things don't always fall out that neatly.

See, when he wrote: "there is such a thing as the Rite of Welcome which can replace the Penitential Rite."

You, like a Pharisee, interpreted it according to the spirit of the English law and you thought he meant:

"there is such a thing as the Rite of Welcome which can replace the Penitential Rite."

How silly of you. If you would just stop acting like a anglo-Pharisee and realize that under the spirit of the Roman law, the literal meaning of that phrase is just something to be aimed at. Not actually achieved. If you had the spirit of Vatican II in you, you would be able to interpret it to mean this:

"I'm sorry, I know I should never tamper with the mass."

See? According to the "spirit of Roman Law" he agrees with you! (Note, he also agrees with you in Bizzaro world).


japhy said...

Is your middle name "Barq's"? Such bite.

I see what you're saying though. I don't know how he can say "humility that supports us in letting go of our own individual preferences" in one part of his response (probably in reference to my "preference" for kneeling during the E.P.) and then stand behind his decisions to avoid the word "mystery" and deviate from the Roman Missal at will.

Tim A. Troutman said...

You know I'm being thoroughly sarcastic here right?

I hope you didn't take any offense at it. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of his letter - especially the opening part about the Roman law and it not meaning anything etc...

japhy said...

No, I get it, Tim. It's just sarcasm with an extra chili pepper's worth of bite to it. ;)

I recognized it for what it was; I am still trying to figure out how to interpret these documents on the liturgy in the "Roman" way (or the Pius IX way).

I'm about to blog about that very issue, by the way. I just finished reading an address by Pope Benedict XVI that I think speaks to this.