I'm going to write about the old program, "The Catholic Hour", for a little bit. Partially because I don't want people to think that this whole blog is about me trying to get a streaming video server up and and online, but mostly because from what I've seen, this was a very underrated show.
"The Catholic Hour" aired on radio in the pre-television days. Like many other shows of it's time, it switched to television in the 1950's and was aired on NBC. From the few episodes I've seen, it always had either something to do with Church history, current events going on in the Church, and other things that dealt with the Catholic way of life. Sometimes, it bordered on "kitchy", but on the whole, the show is definitely a relic of a bygone era, when the media actually didn't have fundamental problems with the Catholic Church as they seem to have today.
I got my first episode of the show in about July 2004. After I had it transferred, I saw that the show was, in fact, ironically titled; it only ran 30 minutes. The particular episode is called "Rome Eternal: Pt. III - The Renaissance". Nice show. While I didn't see anyone famous in there, it went through a lot of origins of the architecture and artwork that the Vatican still has today. And before I purchased it, it was something I never thought ever even existed.
I've bought two more since then; one show about Vatican II from about 1966, and more recently one from the 1950s about Christopher Columbus. I just had the latter transferred, but I'm still cleaning it up for air. What I'd love to do with the Vatican II episode, however, is to actually have a roundtable discussion about it afterwards with two Traditionalist Catholics and two Catholics who don't have a problem with Vatican II. I'd have the four people on the panel watch the show ahead of time, and then sit everyone down for an on-camera forum about it. It'd be kind of like a Catholic version of "The McLaughlin Group." The reason I'd love to do this is because I can sometimes tend to be critcal of both sides.
Dialoguing, in general, is supposed to be listening to one side, then stating your position while the other side listens. What generally happens in a lot of dialogue these days is that both sides try to talk over each other and nobody really seems to want to listen. Progress has been made within the last year or two between Pope Benedict XVI and Bishop Fellay of the Society of St. Pius X, but more work needs to be done.
It never made sense to me that whenever the leadership of the Society of St. Pius X, while appearing to make progress with Rome, suddenly decides that they're getting "too cozy" with Rome and start distancing themselves and making demands that they're really in no position to make. At least that's what it seems like. Likewise, these so called "progressives" within the Church who are so resistant to the Traditional Latin Mass don't realize that by not granting the Indult, or granting it half-heartedly, are actually keeping their local Church in 1966 and NOT moving it forward. Believe it or not, some of the same "progressives" are even against establishing Anglican Use parishes for those Anglicans and Episcopalians who wish to be received into the Church in full communion. Yet, they still refer to themselves as "progressive."
Sidenote: I would love to see the Society of St. Pius X and the Magisterium work out their differences. I think the Society would be an asset to the Church and would actually help tighten things up where they need to be tightened. Having said that, I also understand that much work needs to be done. I hope to be able to help in that work someday, even if in a small part.
Didn't we learn anything from 100 years ago, when there were Eastern Rite Catholics coming into this country who received cold welcomes from Latin Rite bishops? Many of these Eastern Rite immigrants became Eastern Orthodox. Newsflash, folks: It's happening today with those attached to the Traditional Latin Mass, because those who really want it will find it. I know, I know...there are some people who you can NEVER please and will look for reasons to NOT go to an indult Mass, but it's not really fair to say that's the case across the board. Not everyone who attends the old liturgy has the stereotyped schismatic attitude that seems to be so prevalent today; they just want to retain their liturgical traditions.
I guess that's one more reason why I find Cardinal Mahoney's recent remarks somewhat disturbing. In the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, it may very well be true that 99% of the Catholics aren't concerned about the Traditional Latin Mass at all. Perhaps Cardinal Mahoney needs to remember that he's still the local ordinary for that other 1% also.
But I digress. I'm beginning to think that would be a good program to produce.
Now, back to my technical work.