So what? Martini was "in line with the Church's important teachings."
And, if the Tridentine Mass is all important (as the Prowler intimates in discussing Mahoney), McCarrick has three TLMs in Washington.
If this is Wlady Pleizynski(SP?), one can be dubious, especially after his ridiculous conniption fit over Laura Bush's completely innocent comedic routine at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.
The TM is lessimportant than the attitude that the bishops, not the Pope, are the ultimate authority in the Church. The new bishop of Belleville is another asshat who needs a vocation change- he is a Bernardinite.
Whatever, McCarrick was dublicitous in his handing of the Ratzinger letter. He and Mahoney are not facing the "Young Turks" in the Church. IAC. Read Peter Boyle's article in the May 16th New Yorker. It may be that the secularists are beginning to realize that liberal Catholics have been feeding them a line, that they can no longer count on the Conference to support the program of the Democratic Party, But as far as the Tridentine mass is concerned, the pope WILL not subject the people to any monkeying around with the liturgy. As you know this stuff has been going on since the Middle Ages, and all it does to confuse us all. Maritain once wrote that he never expected more from liturgical reform than that the liturgy would be translated into English. Instead we went all the way from a modified form of the dialogue mass to the
1972 reforms. The pope has criticized the turning around of the Altar because it was never mandated and turned the priest into a performer. But as a conservative he knows it is too late to spin it around again.
Aw, Sinky, don't be mad that you weren't important enough to make the article. Where is it that you are a deacon again?