Why did Pope Francis restrict the ancient Latin Mass?

[mourningdove~]

How can so many of us today leave so quickly from "offerings and peace offerings" in "a feast to the LORD", to "rise up to play" - "to revel" - "to dance" to the world's music in this pagan world? Are "the One" and "the other" so near each other in our hearts and not infinitely distant as they are in Truth and in fact? How can we "rise" so quickly in decending so far? Or have we even been in the feast to the LORD at all? Has the N.O. been an unrecognized bridge of descent, exactly the opposite of what it was/is advertised as being?

I could probably sit here tonite and make a list of the possible reasons for the behaviors you describe. I see them, too.

But on a very basic level, it appears to me that many attending the NO do not interiorly 'connect' ... on a supernatural level ... with what is actually happening in the sacrifice of the Mass. And so naturally, there is no lasting impression left with them as they walk out the doors.

 

[Michie]

I do not judge too much when people walk out. A lot of the elderly have to go early to avoid the rush out of the parking lots. Some have appointments or have people sick at home. Etc. That whole scenario is between them and the Lord. I try not to ponder on it too much. The priest has asked that people do not do that unless there is good reason. Some do most don’t. All you can do is pray for their situations.

 

[NextLevel]

But isn't the one crucial question, "What does GOD "prefer"?

I think this is the right question to ask, but with a few caveats.

(1) There is often a temptation to take our own personal preferences and advocate for them under the guise of "this is what God desires". I am not saying that this is the case with you our anyone in particular, but it is certainly something that is prevalent among Christians. I think we have to be careful to examine our own consciences to ensure that we are not using God as a pretense to get what we personally like the best.

(2) Along the same lines, I think there can be a danger in thinking of ourselves as the spokesperson for what God's preferences are; and what is naturally suited towards those preferences. There is one Vicar of Christ; and the Magisterium has a particular teaching authority and guidance by the Holy Spirit. Certainly as laypeople we should read Sacred Scripture and use it is as our guide in our attempt to discern what God wants to the best of our ability. But when what we have discerned is inconsistent with the discernment of the Vicar of Christ and the bishops in communion with him, as Catholics our natural inclination is to investigate where our own analysis may be in error. And here, the fact of the matter is that the last 5 popes, all whom (likely) have superior formal training in the faith than us; and who have received sacraments and other charisms that we have not, have chosen not to return to the 1962 form of the Mass.

(3) Even if we ask what God prefers from a standpoint of genuine devotion, I suspect that the answer does not result in any particular liturgy being superior in this regard. John might have a "preference" for the 1962 form of the Mass because it helps him raise his mind and heart to God in a way that the 1969 form of the Mass does not. Jane might have a "preference" for the 1969 form of the Mass because it helps her raiase her mind and heart to God in a way that the 1962 form of the Mass does not. I do not know, but it could be the case that our Lord views the 1962 as preferable for John and the 1969 as preferable for Jane, because these two different forms help both of them raise their heart and mind to God in the most effective way. The Church has always had multiple rites thoughout Her history at different places, so I think it's difficult to make the case that there must be one single best or "ideal" liturgy (whether it be the 1962, the 1969 or any other form) that we should seek to impose on the Christian world at all times and places.

 

[NextLevel]

How can so many of us today leave so quickly from "offerings and peace offerings" in "a feast to the LORD", to "rise up to play" - "to revel" - "to dance" to the world's music in this pagan world? Are "the One" and "the other" so near each other in our hearts and not infinitely distant as they are in Truth and in fact? How can we "rise" so quickly in decending so far? Or have we even been in the feast to the LORD at all? Has the N.O. been an unrecognized bridge of descent, exactly the opposite of what it was/is advertised as being?

With the issue of people "zoning out" and/or immediately leaving at the end of Mass (or right after communion in many cases) - are we to believe that they would have the right disposition towards Mass were they forced to celebrate the 1962? I suspect that if the Church were to switch back to the 1962 form of the Mass, many of the people who may not have the best disposition in the first place, would simply choose not to attend Mass at all. Alternatively, instead of participating actively to some extent in the 1969 form of the Mass, I can see them in the pew at a TLM completely zoned out; reading a book or checking Facebook, if they even show up at all. I suspect here that the problem has to do with the dispostion of individual people rather than the form of the Mass itself.

It seems to me that many of the aliments of the modern Church were already being established far prior to Vatican 2 (see "New Pagans and the Church" written by Ratzinger back in the 1950's for example). It could be the case that the 1969 Mass exacerbated those issues; or it could be that the 1969 Mass has helped to stem the tide and the situation would have been worse had no changes been implemented. Only God can answer that question definitively.

 

[mourningdove~]

How can so many of us today leave so quickly from "offerings and peace offerings" in "a feast to the LORD", to "rise up to play" - "to revel" - "to dance" to the world's music in this pagan world? Are "the One" and "the other" so near each other in our hearts and not infinitely distant as they are in Truth and in fact? How can we "rise" so quickly in decending so far? Or have we even been in the feast to the LORD at all? Has the N.O. been an unrecognized bridge of descent, exactly the opposite of what it was/is advertised as being?

When I really think about it, I think the answer is much simpler than thought!

The people that go to the NO just behave differently than those who go to the TLM.

What is acceptable dress and behavior before, during, and after the NO is different than what is considered acceptable dress and behavior before, during, and after the TLM. I think it may be just that simple.

And dependent upon what is acceptable, is how the people will behave.

For myself, I no longer expect NO folks to behave like TLM folks, while in and around a NO service.
(Just like I don't expect folks at a Country music concert to behave like they're at a symphony orchestra concert. lol)

 

[fide]

My bishop allowed the TLM to continue in my area

It is thriving and growing

I can see why Pope Francis was concerned about any issues with disunity

Let us continue to pray for the chair of St Peter

As an aside, all I can say as to my priest exorcists that I worked with, is that I trust them.

I put my life into the care of the church, signing a consent form along with my spiritual director and another witness

I cannot fathom that they would intentionally mislead me in regards to only doing the Solemn Rite in Latin, because they explained to me that it just worked better in their experience, and got better results and more quickly.

They told me to let go and to trust them completely.

They have the training and education to understand why they chose to recommend to me the TLM and to only speak in Latin during my sessions.

I don't want to get into huge arguments as it only leads to high emotions which Satan can play with.

I was taught to not trust my emotions or to be led by them.

"Act on principle and not on emotion," was one of my most important instructions.

All I can say is that God allowed all of the sorrows because it would result in my running into His arms.

Yes, a thousand times, and Amen:
"All I can say is that God allowed all of the sorrows because it would result in my running into His arms."

St. Luke's Gospel is clear and so helpful, gathering the blessings and the woes that Jesus taught, so tightly together. For those who have ears to hear:

Lk 6:20 And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said: "Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
Lk 6:21 "Blessed are you that hunger now, for you shall be satisfied.
"Blessed are you that weep now, for you shall laugh.
Lk 6:22 "Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they exclude you and revile you, and cast out your name as evil, on account of the Son of man!
Lk 6:23 Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven; for so their fathers did to the prophets.

Lk 6:24 "But woe to you that are rich, for you have received your consolation.
Lk 6:25 "Woe to you that are full now, for you shall hunger.
"Woe to you that laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep.
Luk 6:26 "Woe to you, when all men speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets.

God works all to the good, for those who love Him and are called according to His purpose. To know this is supernatural faith - entirely gift, to those seeking Him. A sense of humor helps, too. In a moment of trial and temptation, humiliation and inconvenience with a little physical suffering, St. Teresa of Avila reportedly said to God in prayer - with a bit of humor: "If this is the way You treat your friends, no wonder You have so few of them." (excuse my paraphrase)

 

[fide]

With the issue of people "zoning out" and/or immediately leaving at the end of Mass (or right after communion in many cases) - are we to believe that they would have the right disposition towards Mass were they forced to celebrate the 1962? I suspect that if the Church were to switch back to the 1962 form of the Mass, many of the people who may not have the best disposition in the first place, would simply choose not to attend Mass at all. Alternatively, instead of participating actively to some extent in the 1969 form of the Mass, I can see them in the pew at a TLM completely zoned out; reading a book or checking Facebook, if they even show up at all. I suspect here that the problem has to do with the dispostion of individual people rather than the form of the Mass itself.

It seems to me that many of the aliments of the modern Church were already being established far prior to Vatican 2 (see "New Pagans and the Church" written by Ratzinger back in the 1950's for example). It could be the case that the 1969 Mass exacerbated those issues; or it could be that the 1969 Mass has helped to stem the tide and the situation would have been worse had no changes been implemented. Only God can answer that question definitively.

Everyone will find what they are seeking: God will make sure of that. The reasonings of men are, in the end, circular. Only God's gifts of holy grace can gather and build up those seeking Truth. Very few are doing it, but I recommend a time of focused, extended, humble listening and prayer of the Book of Revelation. There is much of great relevance to be found there - as also in His many parables that speak Truth seldom heard.

The closing words of Revelation reveal why this Book is NOT widely prayed and listened to, sadly:

Rev 22:10 And he said to me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near.
Rev 22:11 Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy."
Rev 22:12 "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done.
Rev 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."
Rev 22:14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates.
Rev 22:15 Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and every one who loves and practices falsehood.
Rev 22:16 "I Jesus have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star."
Rev 22:17 The Spirit and the Bride say, "Come." And let him who hears say, "Come." And let him who is thirsty come, let him who desires take the water of life without price.
Rev 22:18 I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,
Rev 22:19 and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
Rev 22:20 He who testifies to these things says, "Surely I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!
Rev 22:21 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen.

 

[fide]

I think this is the right question to ask, but with a few caveats.

(1) There is often a temptation to take our own personal preferences and advocate for them under the guise of "this is what God desires". I am not saying that this is the case with you our anyone in particular, but it is certainly something that is prevalent among Christians. I think we have to be careful to examine our own consciences to ensure that we are not using God as a pretense to get what we personally like the best.

(2) Along the same lines, I think there can be a danger in thinking of ourselves as the spokesperson for what God's preferences are; and what is naturally suited towards those preferences. There is one Vicar of Christ; and the Magisterium has a particular teaching authority and guidance by the Holy Spirit. Certainly as laypeople we should read Sacred Scripture and use it is as our guide in our attempt to discern what God wants to the best of our ability. But when what we have discerned is inconsistent with the discernment of the Vicar of Christ and the bishops in communion with him, as Catholics our natural inclination is to investigate where our own analysis may be in error. And here, the fact of the matter is that the last 5 popes, all whom (likely) have superior formal training in the faith than us; and who have received sacraments and other charisms that we have not, have chosen not to return to the 1962 form of the Mass.

(3) Even if we ask what God prefers from a standpoint of genuine devotion, I suspect that the answer does not result in any particular liturgy being superior in this regard. John might have a "preference" for the 1962 form of the Mass because it helps him raise his mind and heart to God in a way that the 1969 form of the Mass does not. Jane might have a "preference" for the 1969 form of the Mass because it helps her raiase her mind and heart to God in a way that the 1962 form of the Mass does not. I do not know, but it could be the case that our Lord views the 1962 as preferable for John and the 1969 as preferable for Jane, because these two different forms help both of them raise their heart and mind to God in the most effective way. The Church has always had multiple rites thoughout Her history at different places, so I think it's difficult to make the case that there must be one single best or "ideal" liturgy (whether it be the 1962, the 1969 or any other form) that we should seek to impose on the Christian world at all times and places.

But to return to my question: do you believe (I use that word carefully) that God has no "preference" (a very poor word to use, in this context) in these 2 liturgies? God wants and seeks worship "in spirit and truth"! How much clearer can it be?

Jn 4:21 Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.
Jn 4:22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.
Jn 4:23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him.
Jn 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."

Is "crowd appeal" listed here, anywhere? God is clear; men are confused. Everyone when he is fully taught will be like his teacher.

 

[NextLevel]

Everyone will find what they are seeking: God will make sure of that. The reasonings of men are, in the end, circular. Only God's gifts of holy grace can gather and build up those seeking Truth. Very few are doing it, but I recommend a time of focused, extended, humble listening and prayer of the Book of Revelation. There is much of great relevance to be found there - as also in His many parables that speak Truth seldom heard.

The closing words of Revelation reveal why this Book is NOT widely prayed and listened to, sadly:

Thanks for the suggestion. I think Scott Hahn wrote a book comparing the Mass and Revelation. Have not read it yet but hope to at some point.

 

[NextLevel]

But to return to my question: do you believe (I use that word carefully) that God has no "preference" (a very poor word to use, in this context) in these 2 liturgies?

I do not know whether God has a “preference” (for lack of a better word as you note) between those two. I cannot read His mind at will, and there is nothing in Sacred Scripture or Tradition that clearly indicates that He prefers one over the other.

I believe that the transition to the 1969 form of the Mass was the will of Christ and that the Holy Spirit guided the Church to make that change, because Pope Paul VI expressly taught that as part of his ordinary magisterium. I can say that much.

God wants and seeks worship "in spirit and truth"! How much clearer can it be?

Absolutely. I totally agree that God wants us to worship in spirit and truth. That is clearly expressed in the text of Sacred Scripture (although there are differing views on what it means to worship in spirit and truth).

Is "crowd appeal" listed here, anywhere?

I do not see it listed there. But from that I do not think it follows that “crowd appeal” (however one might define it) is not a factor that the Church should consider when deciding the liturgy. We are not a “Sola Scriptura” church after all.

For example, there is a certain “crowd appeal” in the use of the vernacular. Pope Paul VI taught that use of the vernacular will aid the laity in understanding the Mass and thereby encourage them to participate more actively in the prayer. Here, we can see that a factor such as “crowd appeal” can serve the purpose of worshiping in spirit and truth. "Crowd appeal" and proper worship are not necessarily in conflict.

God is clear; men are confused. Everyone when he is fully taught will be like his teacher.

Men are confused, but the Church is not (in my opinion).

With respect to the perspicuity of Scripture (if that is what you refer to by "God is clear"), the Church has not taught that Sacred Scripture is formally sufficient. That is, Sacred Scripture cannot be interpreted correctly apart from Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium. Here, I would note again that none of the previous 5 popes have seen it fit to return to the 1962 form of the Mass. From that I think it is fair to conclude that the Magisterium does not interpret Sacred Scripture in a way such that the 1962 form of the Mass is seen as more aligned with the goal of fostering proper worship than the 1969 form.

 

[fide]

.....
Absolutely. I totally agree that God wants us to worship in spirit and truth. That is clearly expressed in the text of Sacred Scripture (although there are differing views on what it means to worship in spirit and truth).

I do not see it listed there. But from that I do not think it follows that “crowd appeal” (however one might define it) is not a factor that the Church should consider when deciding the liturgy. We are not a “Sola Scriptura” church after all.

For example, there is a certain “crowd appeal” in the use of the vernacular. Pope Paul VI taught that use of the vernacular will aid the laity in understanding the Mass and thereby encourage them to participate more actively in the prayer. Here, we can see that a factor such as “crowd appeal” can serve the purpose of worshiping in spirit and truth. "Crowd appeal" and proper worship are not necessarily in conflict.
.....

St. Paul approaches this fact of "differing views on what it means to worship in spirit and truth", as he teaches an essential, highly relevant and crucially important Truth:

1Cor 2:13 And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit.
1Cor 2:14 The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
1Cor 2:15 The spiritual man judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.
1Cor 2:16 "For who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ.
1Co 3:1 But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ.

"God wants us to worship in spirit and truth" as HE means it, as He understands it. Paul rightly understands Him, because as he asserts - factually, boldly, yet I would insist humbly, confessing further "But we have the mind of Christ."

So many among us today are, as Paul phrases it, "men of the flesh, as babes in Christ." Many among us confuse the word "babes" as meaning nothing beyond "recently converted", or "not yet educated in the Faith," or even simply "too young chronologically". But all that confusion only serves to illustrate the truth of it. But Paul is intending to write "spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit." As Jesus did, speaking to Nicodemus, as John the Apostle did writing of it in his Gospel:

Jn 3:3 Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God."
Jn 3:4 Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"
Jn 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Jn 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

The natural man begets a natural understanding; the spiritual, or one supernaturally infused with Gifts of The Spirit, "understands" in the radically different sense of one of the Seven Gifts given to perfect the Virtues. [CCC 1831]

The call of Jesus is into LIFE - not the "life" of this world, which has coming a last day, a final and last moment, and the call into Truth - not the pliant, malleable, often conditional or subjective superficial facts of this moment, but - the eternal and glorious Truth of God. In that divine Reality is the worship God seeks now.

The parable of Judgment Day in Matthew (Mt 25:31-46) reveals surprises to some expecting a different judgment. As surprised as the guest at the Wedding Day parable (Mt 22:12) who was left "speechless" (RSVCE). We in the Church today owe more to the parishioners being formed in today's church environment. I refer to the state of what is called Catholic "adult formation", reflected and perpetuated in the N.O. culture.

 

[mourningdove~]

How can so many of us today leave so quickly from "offerings and peace offerings" in "a feast to the LORD", to "rise up to play" - "to revel" - "to dance" to the world's music in this pagan world? Are "the One" and "the other" so near each other in our hearts and not infinitely distant as they are in Truth and in fact? How can we "rise" so quickly in decending so far? Or have we even been in the feast to the LORD at all? Has the N.O. been an unrecognized bridge of descent, exactly the opposite of what it was/is advertised as being?

Your questions have stuck with me ...
that's why I like your posts, because they often inspire me to think more deeply, even long after I first read them.

So I get concerned, too, for how persons sometimes behave before ... and during ... and after the Mass.
It looks like they don't understand the significance of what is, and has, just happened.
Like they don't understand or believe that they've just had an encounter with God.
Concerning, yep it can be.

While many Christians are indeed carnal ...
and many just don't seem to 'grasp' some things yet ...
we still do live in a fallen world.

Sometimes, maybe often, persons are distracted from the Mass by the cares and worries of this world.

And honestly? I think the brains of many persons today are just not always 'working right'. Example: Some mental health conditions make it hard for persons to maintain 'focus' ... other conditions cause mood swings that can make for sudden changes in behaviors, if the moods aren't regulated well. So, with some conditions, we just will see inconsistency in behavior.

I find it is not always easy in this world to 'abide' in Christ, as I would like to. I love the TLM for the focus, for that hour, that it puts on Christ. My hope, in whatever he may choose to do with the liturgy, is that Pope Leo will be used of God to bring some healthy stability, and right focus, back into the Catholic church world, TLM or not.

I am hoping.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Thanks for the suggestion. I think Scott Hahn wrote a book comparing the Mass and Revelation. Have not read it yet but hope to at some point.

"The Lamb's Supper," by Scott Hahn.

I read it while on a week-end retreat. It was awesome!

 

[bekalc]

I could probably sit here tonite and make a list of the possible reasons for the behaviors you describe. I see them, too.

But on a very basic level, it appears to me that many attending the NO do not interiorly 'connect' ... on a supernatural level ... with what is actually happening in the sacrifice of the Mass. And so naturally, there is no lasting impression left with them as they walk out the doors.

I am just so tired of this kind of judgements.

Since folks seek out the TML i am sure you have an extremely educated self selected group of people.

BUT one of the reports during Vatican II is the public for the most part did not understand what was going in the Mass. That most of the masses were Low Masses.

And often times you had folks doing other things during the Mass.

The one time I went to Latin Mass. I was completely lost in what was going on because the Priest was whispering so I could not even follow with the Missle.

My mom also grew up Catholic as a child under TLM and Novus Ordo was implimentes when she was like 12 and she says she really didn't understand what was going on in TLM and the New Mass made things better.

I also have several family members including Grandma (who left Catholicism) who grew up in TLM went to Catholic schools and didn't really get well catechized which is part of why they left.

In other hand had Grandmother very devout all her life who joyfully saw the Mass as just the Mass that even under dementia! Would lovingly mouth the words of the liturgy! She didn't even know who she was! And this is Novus Ordo.

There are huge benefits to Novos Ordo. More lay participation so they know whats happening and language folks understand.

Now I don't mind at all folks prefering Latin Mass. But I am really frustrated with these types of comments.

If TLM was still in place there would absolutely be folks attending who didn't know what was happening.

 

[Michie]

I am just so tired of this kind of judgements.

Since folks seek out the TML i am sure you have an extremely educated self selected group of people.

BUT one of the reports during Vatican II is the public for the most part did not understand what was going in the Mass. That most of the masses were Low Masses.

And often times you had folks doing other things during the Mass.

The one time I went to Latin Mass. I was completely lost in what was going on because the Priest was whispering so I could not even follow with the Missle.

My mom also grew up Catholic as a child under TLM and Novus Ordo was implimentes when she was like 12 and she says she really didn't understand what was going on in TLM and the New Mass made things better.

I also have several family members including Grandma (who left Catholicism) who grew up in TLM went to Catholic schools and didn't really get well catechized which is part of why they left.

In other hand had Grandmother very devout all her life who joyfully saw the Mass as just the Mass that even under dementia! Would lovingly mouth the words of the liturgy! She didn't even know who she was! And this is Novus Ordo.

There are huge benefits to Novos Ordo. More lay participation so they know whats happening and language folks understand.

Now I don't mind at all folks prefering Latin Mass. But I am really frustrated with these types of comments.

If TLM was still in place there would absolutely be folks attending who didn't know what was happening.

There is room for both forms of the Mass imo. The whole TLM vs. NO really is turning into a case of the Starbellied Sneeches imo. There are those that attend NO that still have no idea what’s going on. It’s going to happen no matter what.

 

[mourningdove~]

I am just so tired of this kind of judgements.

I'm sorry to hear that.

So maybe stay out of these threads, where the TLM is being discussed?
There rarely are very many of them, so they should be easy to avoid.

And there are plenty of other threads ... most where I don't engage ... where you could fellowship.

No one should come here and get sick feelings. Again, I am sorry my posts make you sick.
But you are not alone in expressing that opinion; others here have expressed similar sentiments.
(Quite a few really, when I think back now on things that have been posted.)

A simple solution would have been to reopen the Traditional forum, when a vote was taken here a few months ago.
But that vote did not pass, so I guess some did not feel so sick as to want to remove these discussions.

I guess another solution could be to 'ban' all discussion of the TLM here.
Maybe that could be voted on, if enough here are feeling sick of these discussions and want them to end.
(If someone wants to initiate that action, for the good of the forum, I will understand and not take it personally.)

Right now ... new pope ... the TLM is a very hot topic of discussion.
I hope that pretty soon, Pope Leo will express his views on this.
And after he does, there may still be alittle chatter for awhile ... but hopefully the discussions will die down.

FTR, I don't initiate many threads in this forum. So, I am not responsible that these discussions are here.
Again, a forum ban on TLM discussions wouldn't be hard to implement.
But I'm not the one in control of that. I'm not in control of anything here. lol

I hope in some way it made you feel better, to express your disdain.
Sometimes that does help.

 

[mourningdove~]

There is room for both forms of the Mass imo. The whole TLM vs. NO really is turning into a case of the Starbellied Sneeches imo. There are those that attend NO that still have no idea what’s going on. It’s going to happen no matter what.

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God."

You have been very kind and understanding about these discussions.
Thank you.

 

[Michie]

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God."

You have been very kind and understanding about these discussions.
Thank you.

You’re very welcome.

 

[NextLevel]

St. Paul approaches this fact of "differing views on what it means to worship in spirit and truth", as he teaches an essential, highly relevant and crucially important Truth:

"God wants us to worship in spirit and truth" as HE means it, as He understands it. Paul rightly understands Him, because as he asserts - factually, boldly, yet I would insist humbly, confessing further "But we have the mind of Christ."

So many among us today are, as Paul phrases it, "men of the flesh, as babes in Christ." Many among us confuse the word "babes" as meaning nothing beyond "recently converted", or "not yet educated in the Faith," or even simply "too young chronologically". But all that confusion only serves to illustrate the truth of it. But Paul is intending to write "spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit." As Jesus did, speaking to Nicodemus, as John the Apostle did writing of it in his Gospel:

The natural man begets a natural understanding; the spiritual, or one supernaturally infused with Gifts of The Spirit, "understands" in the radically different sense of one of the Seven Gifts given to perfect the Virtues. [CCC 1831]

The call of Jesus is into LIFE - not the "life" of this world, which has coming a last day, a final and last moment, and the call into Truth - not the pliant, malleable, often conditional or subjective superficial facts of this moment, but - the eternal and glorious Truth of God. In that divine Reality is the worship God seeks now.

We can say that St. Paul and the other apostles had the mind of Christ, especially insofar as their public revelation.

I most certainly do not have the mind of Christ. My frequent trips to the confessional are enough of a reminder of that. But through God's grace I hope to move closer to him day by day.

I suspect that there are many people who claim to have the mind of Christ but are far from it. I would not want to follow such a person. If I am to allow a person to influence me, I would want that person to be a reliable guide.

So, where do I look for that guide? Well, the Church is the bride of Christ. The pope is the successor of Peter and the vicar of Christ. Her bishops are the successors of the apostles. If we are trying to conform our mind to the mind of Christ, it seems to me that a great place to start is by attempting to follow what the Magisterium teaches.

The parable of Judgment Day in Matthew (Mt 25:31-46) reveals surprises to some expecting a different judgment. As surprised as the guest at the Wedding Day parable (Mt 22:12) who was left "speechless" (RSVCE). We in the Church today owe more to the parishioners being formed in today's church environment. I refer to the state of what is called Catholic "adult formation", reflected and perpetuated in the N.O. culture.

There are different communities of people around the world who celebrate the NO, many communities around the world who celebrate the TLM, each with their own particular cultural expressions of their faith. One thing that they all share is that none of these communities are perfect and the people who form these communities have room to grow in the faith, including myself. So perhaps my time might be better spent trying to better conform my own life to Jesus, regardless of the state of the world around me.

 

[fide]

Your questions have stuck with me ...
that's why I like your posts, because they often inspire me to think more deeply, even long after I first read them.

So I get concerned, too, for how persons sometimes behave before ... and during ... and after the Mass.
It looks like they don't understand the significance of what is, and has, just happened.
Like they don't understand or believe that they've just had an encounter with God.
Concerning, yep it can be.

While many Christians are indeed carnal ...
and many just don't seem to 'grasp' some things yet ...
we still do live in a fallen world.

Sometimes, maybe often, persons are distracted from the Mass by the cares and worries of this world.

And honestly? I think the brains of many persons today are just not always 'working right'. Example: Some mental health conditions make it hard for persons to maintain 'focus' ... other conditions cause mood swings that can make for sudden changes in behaviors, if the moods aren't regulated well. So, with some conditions, we just will see inconsistency in behavior.

I find it is not always easy in this world to 'abide' in Christ, as I would like to. I love the TLM for the focus, for that hour, that it puts on Christ. My hope, in whatever he may choose to do with the liturgy, is that Pope Leo will be used of God to bring some healthy stability, and right focus, back into the Catholic church world, TLM or not.

I am hoping.

The way of Christ is the way of the cross. His teaching:

Mt 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.
Mt 7:14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard [lit Gk "of tribulation"] that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

No wonder "few" find HIs way - many reject or avoid it preferring the "easy". I.e. "Have a nice day!" It is a struggle to find Truth: but those who seek it, will find it.