Some of Cardinal Levada's remarks at the recent consecration of the newly constructed FSSP chapel have drawn criticism from tradition-minded Catholics who question why the Cardinal couldn't just "let 'em have their day". For example, the Cardinal made reference to the (delusive?) claim that "that the two forms of the usage of the Roman Rite, the Extraordinary and the Ordinary Forms, can be mutually enriching to each other" and claimed - contrary to a recent document - that (gulp) "the new prefaces can and should be introduced into the old Missal".
At the consecration of the chapel - a chapel which is designed specifically for the traditional rite - he also...
* referred to a "beautiful preface" in the Missal of Paul VI for the anniversary of a dedication of a church which he claimed "can help to enrich our understanding of the celebration today"
* spoke of the supposed "continuity that we can see" between the TLM and the NO
* made a comparison (i.e. "It is also the same principle that is operative...") between orders celebrating the TLM and soon-to-be former Anglicans who will preserve "some of the richness of their liturgical and spiritual patrimony" (a "patrimony" tied to an act of disobedience against Christ's Church and for which their orders ultimately lost their validity) after converting to the Catholic Church
* unequivocally asserted that Vatican II is the "work of the Holy Spirit"
* referred to "generous steps" in the Motu Proprio (something demanded even by justice itself is now thought to be "generous"?)
Cardinal Levada has been criticized in the past for not permitting even one public celebration of the TLM under "indult" in his former Archdiocese.
Related: The Traditional Latin ('Tridentine') Mass vs. the New (Novus Ordo) Mass | Vatican II and its Fruits
[3/5]
Posts
