The Recovering Choir Director

I did read the article through. As a piece of argumentation, it is severely lacking, and that is being very charitable. Many conclusions and speculations do not logically flow from facts asserted. That is also putting aside the moral issues of detraction and calumny. (Even Rembert Weakland is not exempt from consideration on the last point, btw.)

If by linking to the article one intended anything other than to reveal an object lesson in poor argumentation, then I question the judgment in linking to such a piece. The piece does genuine dishonor to credible criticisms and concerns that have been raised concerning the implementation of the conciliar liturgical renewal and reforms.

Peace, all.

I’m not even going to bother reading the article. The title is silly enough to tell me I’d be doing better to read a psalm instead.

I also find objectionable the characterization that Weakland devoted “his considerable energy towards seemingly unrepentant disobedience, subversion and confusion.”

This also is calumny, and given that disagreement can be phrased more charitably, reflects extremely poorly on the host of this site, who otherwise shows a great degree of respect to the varied viewpoints posted here. Shame!

EMJ. Oh, my. His problem is that the horse he’s flaying long since crumbled to dust, and he needs to find something else to talk about. His psychosexual metanarrative as The Key To Explaining Everything has played out.

Re: Weakland. I’ve heard much about his reputation as a chant scholar.

Eh? Sure couldn’t tell. He might as well have been an expert in Sanskrit for all the impact it had on the liturgy he engineered.