A Meeting on the Summorum Pontificum("Latin Mass") Goes Bad In the Diocese of St Augustine

I think I have stated this before , but I think I shall again. I am pretty excited about the Extraordinary form of the Mass being more widely available. I say that despite the fact it will not be the Mass and Liturgy that is my main spiritual nourishment. What I am thrilled about is that it will have effects on the regular form of the mass as wee as bring converts into the Church.

I am also concerned that the rights of Catholics be respected. Yes we have rights. Canon Law spells out a good many of those rights. Too often I have seen those ignored. The Summorum Pontificum spells out our rights too.

I do find it interesting that a battle over the "latin Mass" is appearing to be broiling in the Diocese of St Augustine Florida. It does seem appropriate because this is the oldest settlement in the United States. Which by the way was Catholic.

Father Z has at What Does The Prayer Really Say? has a post Meeting in D. of St. Augustine on Motu Proprio: older Mass better for people with ADD . He give his own commentary. Now to be affair this is from the notes of a blogger that was there. However the Diocese of St Augustine really can't gripe about that since they demanded no recordings etc etc.

Now there is some background to this. Father Z posted on what he and many viewed other viewed as a horrible "statement" for the Diocese a while back here atShocking Memorandum of Diocese of St. Augustine (FL - USA) on the Motu Proprio . Now I blogged(it is somewhere on here) that I thought it was shocking too.

However, an Orthodox Catholic Seminarian that I respect entered into the conversation on his blog and at Father Z's comment sections. He brought up some valid points and I decided to take a way a see attitude. That Priest in training blogger is Ascent to Mount Carmel. His entry on the matter was A Debate on Summorum Pontificum. In the "Shocking Memorandum" link above he is the "Paul Hamilton" poster. Again he made good points and I think his points were valid.

However if this meeting went down like it appears it did , I think there might be problems. I think there is a World of difference in attitude between the Diocese of St Augustine and this statement from the Diocese of Lake Charles in my home state where the Bishop said in part:
I recall as a child encountering the “Dominican Rite” with its slight variations while serving Mass or learning about the ancient “Ambrosian Rite” celebrated in Milan, Italy. The history of the Church is rich, and the Church is universal. It is much broader than anyone can possibly imagine. In effect, what Pope Benedict XVI has done is respond to a need. In providing for the normal celebration of an older form, the pope is answering the need many have expressed. There are those for whom the older usage of the rite is expressive, uplifting, and prayerful. Why not provide for this need without prejudice to the newer rite? As the pope states, “Let us generously open our hearts and make room for everything that the faith itself allows” (the Papal Explanatory Letter to Bishops of July 7, 2007). As bishop, my role is to act as moderator for the liturgy in the diocese. For that reason I must insure that the Mass of the Roman Rite is celebrated authentically and reverently, whether in the form promulgated by Pope Paul VI or the form of Pope St. Pius V promulgated by Pope Blessed John XXIII.