I am getting questions about the questions I answered. They are serious questions too. I want to answer another one publicly because people ought to know what is going on.
(edited and emphasis mine) I’ve been following the thread "Priests who want ‘tradition’ but retain ‘versus populum,’" and there are a few things which have come up that I don’t understand. … XXX indicated (s)he does not believe the NO is a true Mass and that the flock has been denied access to the true sacraments. … It’s starting to scandalize me. … I have only been Catholic for XXX years, and I don’t understand how one can be Catholic and say the things that XXX and others are saying. One of the things I came to understand as I discovered the Church was the promise that God will never forsake His Church. He will guide it in truth and protect its teachings and ministry. It was this which helped me to trust in and accept the teachings of the magisterium, even when I did not yet understand certain doctrines. … What is becoming less clear, however, is how it could have happened, why it was allowed, and how such things as XXX has suggested do not detract from the validity or efficacy of the "new" sacraments. … What are the reasons that we can be sure the Pauline rite is just as much a "true Mass" as is the Pian? Please help me to understand and, thus, to be more confident in my trust that obedience to the Church will not lead me astray. … And that is a very frightening concept to me, who has so recently found security and trustworthiness in the one, true Church.
Here was my e-mail response (edited):
Let me be super telegraphic and offer a few hooks to hang ideas on. This isn’t exhaustive.
First, Fathers such as St. Augustine said that they would not even believe in the Holy Scriptures if the Church did not back them. So, when we see the Holy Father and the bishops promulgating and using these things, we understand their validity. The Church is indefectible. The Church can never become corrupt in either faith or in morals. The Church can never lose the Apostolic hierarchy, or the sacraments through which Christ communicates grace to men. So, ordination with the new rite and the Mass must be valid.
Second, people who have experienced a great deal of pain can entrench themselves in hard positions which give them security. They can be RIGHT but their reasons for their positions go beyond being right… they are also a matter of security, which changes the shape of the dialogue. These people deeply love their Church and their Mass. It hurts them to see stupid and wicked things, without relief, for decades… literally. Yet, to their credit, they persevere, clinging to piece of wood in the flood. They deserve compassion and their reward will be great, provided they persist in charity and not merely their own desires. I am reminded of the way Screwtape suggests to Wormwood how to stimulate the "patient’s" mother to desire only small things but small things that are "just so", so that the focus is always on one’s disappointment.
Third, they all have a really good point. There is a matter of justice in the discussion. All these things we are lacking are really ours, our heritage, we are being cheated out of. So, a measure of moral indignation is called for. However, they will often abdicate reason and shrewdness in their just indignation. Thus, they will scuttle their chances of success when making suggestions and petitions for things (which they ought to be able to have anyway). They forget that the priests and others they are dealing with are people and they begin either to a) speak in a language others don’t understand or b) start bullying. If you want something from someone, speak to him in a language he understands. Don’t petition something from an Italian in Chinese. The traditionalists will often talk beyond, over, or through people, but not TO them. Moreover, just like the tourist who doesn’t know how to explain himself in the language of the country he is in, he will sometimes start shouting and gesticulating aggressively when he gets frustrated.