Traditional feast of Christ the King
A different calendar.
Those who follow the traditional liturgical calendar of the Church, that is, those who attend the Traditional Latin Mass, celebrated the feast of Christ the King today. In the revised liturgical calendar the feast is celebrated on the last Sunday of Ordinary Time, or the Sunday before Advent.
For me, this raises many questions. For one, where is the unity in observance? Other questions arise - such as, does this mean traditional ember days, along with fast and abstinence disciplines, are to be observed? And is it mandatory that they be observed? And by whom? There seems to be much more to the traditional form of Mass, which follows the traditional calendar, than meets the eye. As it stands, the traditional calendar makes no provision for the the newly proclaimed saints, and retains the memorials of the older saints on their traditional feast days. And some traditionalists resent the fact newer saints have supplanted the traditional memorials in the new calendar.
I’m not well versed in liturgical matters, but it seems to me the Traditional rite is a separate rite from the Novus Ordo and not simply the extraordinary form of the ordinary form. Will this result in a reform of the reform, or will it create a “High Church” and a ”Low Church” situation as in Anglicanism?
It seems to me many die-hard traditionalists - those in union with the Holy See - reject many of the reforms of Vatican II as it is. For instance, many traditionalists wouldn’t think of having their children baptized in the new rite of Baptism, choosing instead the traditional rite, because of the exorcism prayers. Although the Rosary isn’t part of the liturgy, not a few traditionalists reject John Paul II’s addition of the Luminous mysteries to the Rosary. And don’t even ask them what they think of the cause for the beatification of JPII.
The blogs are not really reflecting any great effort at unity on the matter of the TLM either. Not a few critique and dissect every statement from any bishop who speaks about the implementation of the Summorum Pontificum. Any priest, religious or lay person who happens to indicate he/she is not a big of the TLM is summarily castigated, often without charity. When a writer does attempt to be objective, the comment box usually fills up with vitriolic attacks.
I find it unsettling.