The Disease in the 'American Church'

There is definitely a sickness in the Catholic Church here in America. In fact, one might even argue that there has been attempt to create a separate church here in America - The American Catholic Church, or as some call it – The American Church. To fully explain this thought, I would have to make a post that would be more of a book, and less of a post. Suffice it to say - there is a disconnect, even a discontinuity between the Catholic Church here in America, and that of the Church centered in Rome.

Now, this is not an argument of my own device, it is in fact an argument made by those that forward this American Church; it is the love-child of those that would paradoxically simultaneously claim allegiance to Rome, and yet criticize and denounce many of their promulgations, teachings, and desires. This disease that exists is deep rooted and has infected the church over the last several decades. It is a disease of dissidence and infidelity. It is a disease of pride, one of having their cake, and eating it too.

An example is evident in a recent post on the PrayTell blog about a priest that has resigned a position  on a teaching board in protest of the new Missal Translation. The following is the Q&A post between the blog editors and Fr. Bouchard, with [my comments in red]:

Fr. Charles Bouchard, OP, past president of Aquinas Institute of Theology in St. Louis, has resigned from the board of the Center for Liturgy at St. Louis University in protest of the forthcoming missal translation. Pray Tell spoke to him about his decision.
* * * * *
Why did you resign from the board of the Center for Liturgy?
I greatly admire the work that the Center for Liturgy does, especially in the area of liturgy and homily resources. However, when education and promotion of the new missal became a central strategic priority, I told them I had to leave the board because I did not feel in good conscience I could promote something I thought was a mistake. [A mistake is vastly different than morally or theologically wrong. As we will see below, his objection is not founded in some objective standard but instead it is a subjective assesment. This is not valid grounds for infidelity to Rome.]

What are your objections to the forthcoming missal?
My objections are on several levels. The first is governance. [By governance he means - power.] This new translation is being imposed on us without adequate consultation and without apparent respect for the needs and cultural sensitivities of the American church. [This is in support of my point above, Fr. Bouchard is the one claiming there is a distinct American church, separate and differnt than the "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church..."] Changes in the liturgy should strengthen worship, reverence, understanding and participation. I can’t see that the new missal is designed to do any of these things. [This statement is not academic. What I mean, is he is making an emotional point here, he cannot say this with any intellectual sincerity. He is a learned man I assume, and this argument would be destroyed in any back and forth debate.]  Why is the American church not being allowed the same freedom with its texts that other language groups have been allowed?
I also object because there are many serious problems with our liturgy: poor music, inadequate participation by the faithful, bad preaching. Why are these issues not addressed with the same determination that was behind the missal revision? [Again, emotional appeal, and a fallacy. The Missal translation and settings are actually addressing portions of these "issues" where relevant.]
Finally, I object to the translation itself. Complaints about words such as “consubstantial” and the replacement of “for you and for all” with “for you and for many” are familiar. But the bigger picture is that there is a lack of appreciation for the beauty inherent in our own language. I have heard that the main reason for the new missal is to provide an English-language editio typica. This is perhaps understandable, but do we have to sacrifice the beauty of our own language to get there?
Why not commission a new version that is faithful to the editio typica, but yet produced by the top theologians and poets? In my experience the best preaching is rooted in metaphors that present the mysteries of the faith in a new light – helping us to grasp them just a bit more fully. Could we not also avail ourselves of this fresh metaphorical language in our liturgical texts as well? Can we not preserve doctrine and metaphor?
Words matter – and not just because they enforce doctrine. They also incite the imagination and enable the gifts of the Holy Spirit to deepen our grasp of God’s presence in our lives. [I applaud Father here, because he makes another compelling emotional argument here. What it lacks though, is any intellectual meat. This argument has at its roots a fear that the 'American Church' looses power [authority] over itself with these changes. This reigns in the liturgical abuses that have been rampant in past decades. This is Rome reclaiming her sheep. Father understands this, and he is correct - Words matter. He couldn't say what he really thinks - these new words will profess a Faith that is vastly different than the one we have today. It will be more Faithful to the One Truth Faith, and it will hopefully undo the past few decades of distortion and modernism.]

Do you think there will be much resistance to the new missal in the larger church?
I don’t think so. Unfortunately, most priests are too busy to protest, and most parishioners are used to the liturgical bar being so low that they probably won’t know or care. I do think that its introduction will cause confusion, especially since many Catholics never understood why we made the last round of liturgical changes. [I could write a book on this answer. Suffice it to say  it will cause confusion because many will see a Mass vastly different in its WORDS than what they are used to – and once the disease is recognized by some the healing will start.]

What do you think our bishops should do? What would a successful missal revision look like?
I think it is too late to do anything now. The new missal is a done deal. But if we were to revise the missal, it would be a thing of exceptional literary, musical and artistic beauty. I wish the bishops would speak more forcefully to Rome about the needs and vitality of the American Church – a church that is arguably still one of the most observant and faithful in the world. [Again he points out a separate and distinct Church. With a capital C, something different from the Church in Rome.] I also wish they would strengthen liturgical music and preaching.
My biggest concern is about the loss of a coherent and effective teaching voice by the U.S. bishops. In my most cynical moments, I think that the Vatican has silenced them as a conference in order to “divide and conquer.” [And here we see the true colors... he sees this as a battle between the Vatican and USCCB – I think he is right, unlike him... I see it as a good thing!]

The battle lines are being drawn - and not by us, but by folks like Father Bouchard. There is a division, a divide, a dissidence that exists and it is a disease that has spread for decades here in America, and finally we are getting some remedy in the form of the coming Missal Translation later this year. People like Fr. Bouchard know that this remedy could exterminate the strain of dissident thought that pervades certain corners of the Church here in the U.S. To those that think as he does, this could be the end of the American Church.

This would mean the extinction of a disease, but it would also mean the end of their legacy and it would delegitimize their beliefs. It would make them a dissident crowd. Their veil would be torn away, and their truth would shine out, in full disfigured form. Their infidelity would be evident for all to see. The emporer would be seen naked, and millions of Catholics in this country would begin to wake up and wipe away the gunk that filled their eyes and slowly begin to see the truth.

Advent 2011 brings with it a cure for a disease. Advent brings the Truth of Christ in a very, very tangible way for us this year.

†††