Gerald, over at The Cafeteria is Closed, brought to my attention an article about our former Bishop here in the Charlotte Diocese, when He posted about this article from the Charlotte Observer.
I can't say as I knew a whole lot about Bishop Curlin, though from all I have heard he seemed to be a kind and gentle soul. In fact, this article brings to mind that it is entirely possible to be sincere and good, and simply be wrong about things. So often, in this liturgical squabble that surrounds us, we tend to look at "the other side" and growl.
Bishop Curlin is a good man, he is just wrong. And in this article, his whole argument is that it would be wrong for the Church to go back to "stern ritualism, Latin Masses and personal piety instead of social action". My college logic classes are decades behind me, but isn't this a false dichotomy? Why the assumption that personal piety and social action are mutually exclusive? Did Catholic charity, and charities, suddenly spring into existence in 1965? It seems to me that the Church was running Hospitals, Orphanages, etc. for centuries. Does that not count? And quite frankly I am a bit weary of the idea that the only indicator of being "christian" is to be charitable anyway.
Loving your neighbor is important, yes, but there is no distinction in that alone! The world is full of charitable heathens! Do not the Romans do as much??? I am not advocating ignoring social action as such. Though I DO advocate having it make some sense. I don't see the moral equivalence between recycling drives and rosaries, I'm sorry. I thought the church was here to save souls, not save the whales! Our dioscean paper is chock-full of largely meaningless social action. Recyling drives global warming awareness, etc. GLOBAL WARMING!!! I believe that it's an issue, but what does that have to do with saving souls??? Did Jesus say that the angels in heaven rejoice every time someone reduces their carbon footprint??? Would He???