Why did Pope Francis restrict the ancient Latin Mass?

[mourningdove~]

But isn't the one crucial question, "What does GOD "prefer"? That is, what liturgy most worthily expresses the truth, justice and love of and for GOD?" Our"preferences" are either irrelevant or revealing of our actual spiritual impediments to Life before God.

The acts of worship of the first brothers, Cain and Abel, are revealing in their consequences - which should be instructive for us all. From the. NABRE on the USCCB website:



Why is this? Hebrews explains:


Here is the mystery: God is the Creator of all, yet He offers grace to some, but not all seek or will receive it.


Cain's heart was revealed to him: He was seeking himself, not worship in spirit and truth of God that He deserves, is owed, and seeks. Our "liturgy wars" reveal sin! This itself ought to drive us to our knees and repent of the poverty of Holy Faith that is so carelessly unobserved and neglected among us, by so many of us.

I don't disagree with anything you've said, but when speaking on this subject here ... I tread 'lightly', since this is a N.O. Catholic forum and most persons here came into the Church under the N.O. (IOW, I don't want to offend anyone.)

"The Church" has said that both liturgies are valid, and so I accept that.

But I agree that what is important is what God wants.

When it comes to the Mass, the question for me would be "What liturgy does God want?" when BOTH have been declared valid? (I know what I believe in my heart, but otherwise I can't say that I have the theological knowledge to answer that question.)

Persons always want to make this discussion about 'what language' is the Mass said in, but it is so much more than that. (I have enough knowledge now to know that more than the language was changed with Vatican II.)

So what liturgy does God want? (Do you know?)
I could say that God wants a holy Mass, a reverent Mass where hearts are fully engaged, etc., etc.
But that begins to sound again like 'preference', though I personally see it as being about much more than that.

I don't know where you stand on the issue, but I will share something Kennedy Hall said the other day that really summed it all up for me. (I will share it, because I know you won't throw rotten tomatoes at me for saying it. lol)

I am not SSPX, just a Trad Catholic who can float fairly comfortably between both the old and the new Catholic Church. But recently when discussing Catholicism, and the two liturgies, K.H. said this:

"The Faith is the old Mass. The new Mass is the new religion."
____________________________________________________________________________________

(I am very sorry if that offends anyone reading, but as a Catholic formed pre-Vatican II, that is how I see it also.)

Note: With regards to the subject of this thread, I believe Pope Francis restricted the Latin Mass because he was working to get rid of all remnants of the 'old' Church, which is what the TLM represents. He was continuing the process of building the 'new' Church, that began with Vatican II.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

So what liturgy does God want? (Do you know?)

Can we all agree on this:

Matthew 25:3
So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there before the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift

 

[mourningdove~]

Can we all agree on this:

Matthew 25:3
So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there before the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift

I agree.

But what is your point in sharing that verse, with regards to the liturgy?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I agree.

But what is your point in sharing that verse, with regards to the liturgy?

My point is that God seems to be more concerned with the heart rather than the particular form of the worship.

 

[fide]

My point is that God seems to be more concerned with the heart rather than the particular form of the worship.

Jesus clarified the desire in God for rightful - righteous - worship (or better, adoration) to one who may have thought she (the woman of Samaria) knew about it but did not (yet), when He said to her:

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."

Great mystery remains in this issue, however, because essential to this two-fold criteria stated by Jesus is "spirit". The Jews were given/entrusted with Truth in the Law, but the supernatural and divine Truth can be known, and understood, and lived only in and by the "spirit" - which is to say, the Holy Spirit and the supernatural Virtues and supernatural Gifts that He, in His "Self-outpouring," would make present to humanity very soon, as Jesus well knew.

St. Paul well understood, and deeply, the problems among many who carried the name "Christian," yet revealing a spectrum of grasp - or understanding - of the Truth of God needed for "worship in spirit and truth." In Corinth he encountered the problem among "brothers". Here he expresses the understanding we need, yet cannot simply claim or assume or presume, because it is by Gift with must be rightly sought.

1Co 2:6 Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away.
1Co 2:7 But we [here Paul speaks of himself in communion with the other Apostles, "we"] impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glorification.
1Co 2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
1Co 2:9 But, as it is written, "What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him,"
1Co 2:10 God has revealed to us [to those "us", that is, truly sent by Christ and the Spirit] through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God.
1Co 2:11 For what person knows a man's thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
1Co 2:12 Now we ["we" including Paul who have received these Gifts] have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.
1Co 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.
1Co 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.
1Co 2:15 The spiritual man judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.
1Co 2:16 "For who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?" But we [ again, "we" who have been taught and formed in Him] have the mind of Christ.

Paul is thus pointing to the communion among believers in which "worship in spirit and truth" is possible.
And in Him IS unity - communion - holy fellowship and holy worship/adoration. Reconciliation with the world is not possible; the world hates Christ and His own. The schism separating Christians from the world was begun and intended by Christ Himself:

Mt 10:34 "Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.
Mt 10:35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
Mt 10:36 and a man's foes will be those of his own household.
Mt 10:37 He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;
Mt 10:38 and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
Mt 10:39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.

 

[mourningdove~]

My point is that God seems to be more concerned with the heart rather than the particular form of the worship.

I would agree, in that I do believe God is concerned about our heart motives in all that we do.

As to whether or not the Lord prefers a particular form of worship (liturgy)? I still have more to learn ...

I do know that in the Old Testament God was very particular about the sacrifices that were considered acceptable to Him. How that translates into the New Testament, I'm not quite sure.

I was thinking about the "worshipping in Spirit and truth" verse, before seeing that fide had posted it.
But I will give that time 'to absorb' before making any further comment ...

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I would agree, in that I do believe God is concerned about our heart motives in all that we do.

As to whether or not the Lord prefers a particular form of worship (liturgy)? I still have more to learn ...

I do know that in the Old Testament God was very particular about the sacrifices that were considered acceptable to Him. How that translates into the New Testament, I'm not quite sure.

I was thinking about the "worshipping in Spirit and truth" verse, before seeing that fide had posted it.
But I will give that time 'to absorb' before making any further comment ...

Yes, the instruction given to Moses were very explicit and demanding.
Our best model for liturgical form seems to be a blend of Jewish practice of scripture and reflection + The Lord's Supper.

AI Overview: We also read in Acts 2:42 the early church devoted themselves to "the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, to the breaking of bread, and to prayers". Acts 20:7 describes the disciples gathering "on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread". These verses highlight the importance of fellowship, sharing meals, and celebrating the Lord's Supper within the early church.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

But back to OP, Is it really the language that is at issue? Or a continuity of "tradition" that includes language?

 

[mourningdove~]

Jesus clarified the desire in God for rightful - righteous - worship (or better, adoration) to one who may have thought she (the woman of Samaria) knew about it but did not (yet), when He said to her:

Great mystery remains in this issue, however, because essential to this two-fold criteria stated by Jesus is "spirit". The Jews were given/entrusted with Truth in the Law, but the supernatural and divine Truth can be known, and understood, and lived only in and by the "spirit" - which is to say, the Holy Spirit and the supernatural Virtues and supernatural Gifts that He, in His "Self-outpouring," would make present to humanity very soon, as Jesus well knew.

St. Paul well understood, and deeply, the problems among many who carried the name "Christian," yet revealing a spectrum of grasp - or understanding - of the Truth of God needed for "worship in spirit and truth." In Corinth he encountered the problem among "brothers". Here he expresses the understanding we need, yet cannot simply claim or assume or presume, because it is by Gift with must be rightly sought.

Paul is thus pointing to the communion among believers in which "worship in spirit and truth" is possible.
And in Him IS unity - communion - holy fellowship and holy worship/adoration. Reconciliation with the world is not possible; the world hates Christ and His own. The schism separating Christians from the world was begun and intended by Christ Himself:

What happens in the Mass is mystical.
I get it. I grew up at a time in the Church where the mystical was still being emphasized.

Christianity is a mystical religion.
But with the Reformation, Christianity quickly began to lose that sense.
And then with Vatican II, the RC itself moved away from talking about things mystical or using the mystical language.

But the Latin Mass captures the mysticism. There is no denying it.
The N.O. just really does not, for me.

Why would Pope Francis want to restrict or end the Latin Mass?
Perhaps to remove any lingering remembrance of mysticism from the Church.

 

[fide]

But back to OP, Is it really the language that is at issue? Or a continuity of "tradition" that includes language?

As I understand the controversy, it is most fundamentally the Tradition that is crucial. The language is important to the preservation of the (capital T) Sacred Tradition, thus it is not negligible. The Mass was primarily a Sacrifice - The Sacrifice made Present here, now, everywhere. The NO made the liturgy more about "us" - a change favorable, sadly, to many of us.

 

[fide]

What happens in the Mass is mystical.
I get it. I grew up at a time in the Church where the mystical was still being emphasized.

Christianity is a mystical religion.
But with the Reformation, Christianity quickly began to lose that sense.
And then with Vatican II, the RC itself moved away from talking about things mystical or using the mystical language.

But the Latin Mass captures the mysticism. There is no denying it.
The N.O. just really does not, for me.

Why would Pope Francis want to restrict or end the Latin Mass?
Perhaps to remove any lingering remembrance of mysticism from the Church.

The mystical reality of the Traditional Liturgy of the Mass - the TLM - is essential to the "Spirit and Truth" sought by God. It is not to be "all about us"! Yet this is what many want; these do not understand what they actually need, what their souls actually hunger and thirst for. Why do they not understand? Because in the current state of the Church, our adult formation is impoverished in famine.

 

[RileyG]

How much more so the grammar, constructions and greater vocabulary.

Yeah. I wonder if my brain is plastic enough to learn Latin, I just know a few phrases here and there.

 

[RileyG]

The mystical reality of the Traditional Liturgy of the Mass - the TLM - is essential to the "Spirit and Truth" sought by God. It is not to be "all about us"! Yet this is what many want; these do not understand what they actually need, what their souls actually hunger and thirst for. Why do they not understand? Because in the current state of the Church, our adult formation is impoverished in famine.

I also think the Tridentine rite is more pleasing to God, in my opinion.

 

[mourningdove~]

The mystical reality of the Traditional Liturgy of the Mass - the TLM - is essential to the "Spirit and Truth" sought by God. It is not to be "all about us"! Yet this is what many want; these do not understand what they actually need, what their souls actually hunger and thirst for. Why do they not understand? Because in the current state of the Church, our adult formation is impoverished in famine.

Yes, and there are online apostolates where one can study more and go deeper in the faith, if they have the desire, and the time, and a few dollars to spare. Like, the Saint Paul Center (Scott Hahn; 30-day free trial) and the New Saint Thomas Institute (Taylor Marshall), to name a couple of them.

 

[mourningdove~]

The mystical reality of the Traditional Liturgy of the Mass - the TLM - is essential to the "Spirit and Truth" sought by God. It is not to be "all about us"!

You and I and others here know this, so it's very hard for me to understand how a priest or cardinal or pope (who also knows this) can be in favor of restricting or eliminating the TLM.

This is one of those areas where I continue to trust God. And maybe the new pope will see fit to loosen restrictions.

 

[RileyG]

You and I and others here know this, so it's very hard for me to understand how a priest or cardinal or pope (who also knows this) can be in favor of restricting or eliminating the TLM.

This is one of those areas where I continue to trust God. And maybe the new pope will see fit to loosen restrictions.

Amen. Trust in God. He’s sovereign.

 

[fide]

Yes, and there are online apostolates where one can study more and go deeper in the faith, if they have the desire, and the time, and a few dollars to spare. Like, the Saint Paul Center (Scott Hahn; 30-day free trial) and the New Saint Thomas Institute (Taylor Marshall), to name a couple of them.

The one teacher we need charges only one thing: He insists we pay everything we have - like the poor widow who put into the treasury "all the living she had." It is ourselves we must offer. Other than that, the cost of admission is free, and the reward is freedom indeed. Beware of celebrity saints; their ladders don't reach high enough. The wisdom we need is very simple, found in detachment from the world and total self-gift in obedience to God. If we would hear the sermon on the mount, and receive it as it deserves, we would find more than we could expect. If we would pray the Our Father in complete obedience, we would need no more. The summary/conclusion of that "Sermon on the Mount" is true. Jesus teaches Truth:

Mt 7:24 "Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house upon the rock;
Mt 7:25 and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock.
Mt 7:26 And every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand;
Mt 7:27 and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell; and great was the fall of it."

 

[fide]

You and I and others here know this, so it's very hard for me to understand how a priest or cardinal or pope (who also knows this) can be in favor of restricting or eliminating the TLM.

This is one of those areas where I continue to trust God. And maybe the new pope will see fit to loosen restrictions.

It is one thing "to know about"; another "to know." There are persons who seek Self above all, no matter what or how much they "know about."
The next pope may well be decisive, in determining how close or how far we are from the final Harvest. It is crucially important to trust God, no matter what. In Him we are safe, no matter what.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The mystical reality of the Traditional Liturgy of the Mass - the TLM - is essential to the "Spirit and Truth" sought by God. It is not to be "all about us"! Yet this is what many want; these do not understand what they actually need, what their souls actually hunger and thirst for. Why do they not understand? Because in the current state of the Church, our adult formation is impoverished in famine.

The Novus Ordo is also just as mystical and essential to the Spirit of Truth. Latin was not revealed by God. It was the language of oppression. If anything made it sacred over the centuries it was its use in liturgy. But then any language can and should be used in liturgy. I think we need to be clear that this concern for "Tradition" related to Latin is Eurocentric tradition. It is not scriptural and it is missing the point of the Gospel. So focus on Latin makes it all about us, not God.

That being said, I do think there is still value in Eurocentric tradition for people of Eurocentric roots. Latin, the language of brutal imperialists slowly evolved to become ecclesial Latin. The "c" shifted from a harsh "k" sound to softer "Ch". "AE" shifted from "eye" to "aye", etc. What became sacred for us was the meaning of the words like "Agnus Dei", "Gloria Patri.." Latin or vernacular only convey the meaning. But for me, ecclesial Latin connects us to centuries of saints, history and teaching. I am just saying, let us be careful that we do not become superstitious about Latin. And certainly we cannot let it divide us.

 

[fide]

The Novus Ordo is also just as mystical and essential to the Spirit of Truth. Latin was not revealed by God. It was the language of oppression. If anything made it sacred over the centuries it was its use in liturgy. But then any language can and should be used in liturgy. I think we need to be clear that this concern for "Tradition" related to Latin is Eurocentric tradition. It is not scriptural and it is missing the point of the Gospel. So focus on Latin makes it all about us, not God.

That being said, I do think there is still value in Eurocentric tradition for people of Eurocentric roots. Latin, the language of brutal imperialists slowly evolved to become ecclesial Latin. The "c" shifted from a harsh "k" sound to softer "Ch". "AE" shifted from "eye" to "aye", etc. What became sacred for us was the meaning of the words like "Agnus Dei", "Gloria Patri.." Latin or vernacular only convey the meaning. But for me, ecclesial Latin connects us to centuries of saints, history and teaching. I am just saying, let us be careful that we do not become superstitious about Latin. And certainly we cannot let it divide us.

The great advantage of ecclesial Latin over a "living" language is that the later is subject to the whims and fads and styles of never- ending generations, each separating itself from its parents with its own subcultural dialect. Examples: queer, straight, liberal, radical, man, woman, racist, phobic, .... Humanity simply cannot or will not leave language and words alone. And satan loves, and works well, in confusion.