The news just dropped this morning https://apnews.com/article/pope-francis-latin-mass-restrictions-827cf0b06354413c424ec276ea744bab “Pope doubles down on quashing old Latin Mass with new limits” https://catholicfamilynews.com/blog...ecreeing-the-end-of-ecclesia-dei-communities/ “The Second Atomic Bomb Has Exploded: CDW Issues Directives Banning Traditional Confirmations and Ordinations, Decrees the End of Ecclesia Dei Communities” Meanwhile there is no one who can ban traditional Anglicanism
Francis is in effect saying, "My way or the highway." If RCs had any sense, they'd hit the highway! The pope says he wants to reduce division within his church. If he keeps it up, he'll succeed... there will be no division, because everyone will have left.
Actually, after reading the CFN article, I've changed my mind about this. the writer of the article states that the Latin Mass should be retained because the New Mass "obscures such doctrines as the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the unique role of the sacrificing priest, the Communion of Saints, sin, and the unique privileges of the Blessed Virgin Mary." Since the Mass should not be sacrificial in nature and highlighting "unique privileges" of Mary takes attention away from Jesus (who deserves all the attention), getting rid of the Latin Mass is a good thing (spiritually and doctrinally). As for the allegation that the New Mass "obscures the Real Presence of Christ," I think perhaps the real issue is that the doctrine of transubstantiation is somewhat obscured by the New Mass; one does not need the Latin Rite in order to convey the truth of the Real Presence, as Anglicans demonstrate all the time. The writer expresses concern that the New Mass seems more like a protestant liturgy. Well, la-de-da! Making the RC's liturgy more like the Anglicans' and distancing from old Roman errors were steps in the right direction. This move by Francis has me thinking that maybe the old fella has 'more on the ball' than I'd been giving him credit for. As for division in the RCC, well.... now that I think on it, adherents to the Old Mass were few and far between. A tiny niche group. Francis isn't going to lose very many people, even if they all fell away from the RCC. And if they simply cannot obtain their preferred Latin Mass, they'll have to settle for a common vernacular one somewhere. Perhaps a number of them will be irritated enough with the pope that they begin to look more closely and seriously at the "other Catholics" (us).
I have a few views on this... firstly I agree with the criticisms of the latin mass obviously, but a good way to fix those issues would be to return it to the patristic model whence it came (under Gregory I and earlier), when it did not have any of the grievous errors that accreted unto it in the middle ages So if they truly wanted to reform the liturgy while retaining the doctrine, they would return the latin liturgy to how it was before the errors instead what they did was throw it out altogether and replace it with the novus ordo Now the novus ordo, at least the way it's practiced in 90% of RCC parishes, leads to lack of faith So they replaced a broken version of Christianity with something which leads to atheism....
Can you describe how or why it leads to lack of faith, in your understanding of the situation? I'm curious to know what you've gleaned about it. What is it about the way it's practiced in most RC parishes?
1. they don't kneel for the sacraments (or for anything), make awkward jokes during sermons... there is a weirdly all-pervasive irreverence, even secularism 2. the music and hymns of the 1960s and 70s are atrocious in every sense of the word, so the music that fills the ears of an average church goer removes any depth from their faith, making it shallow and brittle 3. the clerical culture has trained several generations of clergy who seem to value irreverent demeanour during the liturgy, weird dances, irreverent postures... They simply don't have a supernatural bearing to them 4. the moral collapse has led to laity that is 100% onboard with gay marriage, trans and gender ideology, anything you can name 5. the moral collapse in the clergy has made it utterly irresponsible for a parent to ever leave a child with a priest, or send kids to church programs (when the scandals erupt, what does that lead to if not more atheism?)
I don't think that all of this should be laid simply at the feet of Novus Ordo. The abandonment of Ad Orientum in favour of Ad Populum has a share in this, as the attention and focus is on what is happening on the Altar rather than on the Transcendant nature of God. Let me hasten to add I think both positions are valid, and we should abandon neither. I think it may be entirely6 appropriate to uise Ad Orientum for Advent and Lent, whilst clearly Ad Populum make more sense for Christmas. Whilst this change was concurrent with introduction of Novus Ordo, it should not be confused with Novus Ordo. Anglicans have been celebrating the sacred liturgy in the vulgar tongue (alright not especially vulgar but that is a techbical description of it) for more than 500 years. I think we have to realise that it will take RCC a while to catch up. All of us would do well to focus on the recovery of holiness in life, living and liturgy, and turn our attention to the transendence of God in immanent in our midst.
yes... some of our churches suffer from this also, although the more traditional ones are safe from this to me the issue of the vernacular is a red herring... The key question is, is the language sacred? the vernacular BCP language is sacred, as the latin mass language was sacred... but the vernacular Roman language is somehow secular... The Anglican vernacular is hieratic, incredibly transcendent and as anti-secular as can be, while the Roman novus ordo sometimes feels like a flat essay to suffer through which is one's obligation... Any way those are just my thoughts on the modern experience of Roman catholicism... It is far less sacred than what it was before, and yeah as Rexlion just said, the only sacred worship left in the Western christendom is the Anglican tradition
Here is a case in point from a thread on Reddit at /r/catholicism: Out of fear of impiety, I have been holding back saying many of these things for a while now, but, at some point, you start to go crazy from bottling it up. For example, almost every liturgy I've been to in the ordinary from of the Mass has been largely void of beauty and homilies almost equally void of convicting content. My wife and I have invested ourselves in our local parish, but we are starting to feel discouraged and saddened by the "beige Catholicism" we experience each week and the roadblocks to reform we encounter. We've also tried a handful or other parishes within a reasonable distance from our house, but the experience is not much better and sometimes worse. As difficult as it is to admit this, my experience with the church is becoming a bit of a scandal to me. I became a Christian because I want communion with God, not to join a boomer social club touting vague "go make a difference" slogans. I feel as if I have to regularly explain to my wife and kids that "actually, what we're seeing on Sunday and in our community is really not the fullness of the faith" or "I know Father (or the Pope!) said that, but what he REALLY meant was...", etc. How can that possibly be coherent to my kids if its becoming less and less coherent to me? My greatest fear is that my family will end up just like it was when I was a kid: that my children will think our faith is a joke. I sometimes feel that I can't continue exposing my family to this hollowed out shell of the true faith. I know in my heart of hearts that the Gospel is true, I really have no doubt of that in mind, but I have now found myself seriously researching the claims of other churches.
I think ad orientem is far better. That way the focus is on God. We all face the same direction. With versus populum there can be too many watching the priest and looking for mistakes. The priest leads us in worship; he does not put on a show. Therefore, he only need face us when addressing us. I certainly much prefer ad orientem and think it has much to commend it. I am surprised by how many Anglicans do accept this position which I believe has come to us from Roman Catholicism.
I think it wrong to claim Pope Francis is banning the traditional liturgy. He has placed some very stringent restrictions on its use but he's not completely banned it. I don't think he'll succeed. Many traditionalist Catholics are pushing back. A law doesn't really become a law unless people accept it. There are also some Roman Catholic bishops using aspects of canon law to resist this. I fail to understannd why the pope would want to place such severe restrictions on a part of the Roman Catholic Church that is growing. Not only does it seem foolish from that perspective but it is quite simply cruel to traditional Catholics. The pope most certainly is not acting out of paternal concern for them.
for the same reason why in the Church of England the traditionalists have been put under the boot, and in the old Episcopal church the traditionalists who clinged to the 1662 and the 1928 were put in the gulag... But now the CofE is specially advertising the 1662 services in london, because they're the only ones which draw large crowds.... Book of Common Prayer services see huge numbers tuning in seeking ‘traditional comfort’ amid pandemic lockdowns Church of England parish boosts its flock 20-FOLD after adopting traditional services from the 500-year-old Book of Common Prayer