|
That picture is amazing, congrats Wren!
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 14:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:48 |
|
|
Congrats Wren! Really happy for you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2021 15:02
|
|
|
Could I ask for prayer in a couple of areas? --- for my wife...that she is able to successfully work out her current conflict with her boss and make the changes needed to keep her job --- for my family...that we may be provided for regardless of the results of my wife's situation --- for myself...that I'm able to speak truthfully but respectfully with my wife about what I see in her (bad) choices and that I am able to appropriately manage the very real fear and anxiety I have about this situation. Especially asking that the Holy Family and St. Elizabeth of Hungary pray with us.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2021 14:24
|
|
|
God be with you and your wife.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2021 19:27
|
|
|
Of course, Pershing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2021 19:30
|
|
|
Praying Pershing. Also asking for prayers for the soul of Father Jerome Lukachinsky, one of the Priests at my parent's parish. He passed away a week ago, and is being buried today. Good Priest, had MS his entire life, his death was unexpected.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2021 20:55
|
|
|
Hey religiongoons. Pope Francis is restricting the availability of the Latin Mass, which is going to put a lot of my friends in a very difficult position. I'd appreciate your prayers for the situation. I'm going to continue to be in apparent disobedience for some time I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 19:27
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:Hey religiongoons. Reading up on this I have to say I’m surprised. He didn’t just repeal Pope Benedict XVI’s rule, he made it even more onerous to celebrate the Tridentine Mass. Prayers for you all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:Hey religiongoons. St. Peter, please pray for Worthleast and his fellow parishioners. Any idea what your bishop's opinion is likely to be, Worthleast? (Here's a article for those who don't know what we're on about)
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:12
|
|
|
I must confess I have been eager to read all of your takes on this since it happened, I am not Catholic but from my perspective on the outside this feels like an admission that a split is inescapable and an attempt to rip the bandaid off quickly
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:37
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:I must confess I have been eager to read all of your takes on this since it happened, I am not Catholic but from my perspective on the outside this feels like an admission that a split is inescapable and an attempt to rip the bandaid off quickly I'm not sure he could have provoked more of a battle line with the traditionalists if he tried. “...to determine that these groups do not deny the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs.” He's pretty notorious for weaponized ambiguity in matters of faith and morals, but question Vatican II and you get the Inquisition. I may be a protestant heretic, but I pray there's divine intervention for my Roman friends. They're going to need it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:53
|
|
|
Pershing posted:Any idea what your bishop's opinion is likely to be, Worthleast? https://twitter.com/cnalive/status/1416111149192519687?s=20 Each bishop is free in his own opinion and enforcement, so there will likely be different results everywhere. I'm SSPX, so we'll continue as we always have, though I expect a few new faces this Sunday. Captain von Trapp posted:I'm not sure he could have provoked more of a battle line with the traditionalists if he tried. I do not deny the validity or legitimacy of the liturgical reform, but legitimacy as Pope Francis means it (holy and pleasing to God) and what I mean by it (promulgated by the competent authority) are different. I'm concerned about the immediate implementation: it acquires force immediately, so it affects this Sunday. The lines about no new parishes, no new priests offering it, make me deeply sad. I honestly expected a break from the left in Germany and similar, but this seems to force a battle with the conservatives. Mercy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
Did I read correctly, this does not change the rules surrounding the use of Latin in the Ordinary Form, correct?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
Thirteen Orphans posted:Did I read correctly, this does not change the rules surrounding the use of Latin in the Ordinary Form, correct? This is just concerning the Tridentine Mass, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:44
|
|
|
Freudian posted:This is just concerning the Tridentine Mass, yes. That’s what I thought. Though I don’t want it to come off that I’m implying that because we can still do the OF in Latin that should be enough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:47
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:Hey religiongoons. Offering prayers to you and other TLM folks. I've got a good friend who loves TLM, and has been talking my ear off non-stop about every single rumor the last few months to come out about Pope Francis doing something big about TLM. Turns out he was right, as this is worse than any of the rumors believed. I've only attended a TLM once (Got 'tricked' into going by a buddy, no biggie, he just didn't tell me it was in Latin), I go to a pretty Orthodox NO Parish, but it still makes me sad. Just strikes me that the Pope is taking a few bad examples of radtrads and acting rashly to quash something that isn't there, while there's the very real possibility of a schism in Germany that he seems to care not at all about. His Pontificate has seemed (At least to my admittedly ignorant and sinful self) be riddled with constantly backhanding more conservative elements of the church while shrugging at those dancing along the border of apostasy. He's not the first Pope to act rashly, won't be the last. I still owe him my obedience, as do all lay people. I hope he might change his mind on this, but I remember reading an article a few years ago from an insider in the Vatican that wrote about Francis' personal style of leadership being highly intolerant of any dissent and quick to punish those seen as disloyal (Which was in stark contrast to his welcoming and nice public persona), so I don't think a reflection and walking back is going to take place. Crazy Joe Wilson fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Jul 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 00:43
|
|
|
Thirteen Orphans posted:That’s what I thought. Though I don’t want it to come off that I’m implying that because we can still do the OF in Latin that should be enough. https://twitter.com/BVMConsolatrix/status/1416121644196765698?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:28
|
|
|
That’s not right. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
The Novus Ordo is copyrighted? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 02:12
|
|
|
Sure. In this day and age, that's only prudent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 02:18
|
|
|
Traditionis Custodes posted:Art. 3. The bishop of the diocese in which until now there exist one or more groups that celebrate according to the Missal antecedent to the reform of 1970: This is hard. Traditional Catholic groups have been growing too much, so they cannot grow anymore. I've attended the traditional Latin Mass my whole life, and I will continue to do so. It's not a question of nostalgia for a time when I didn't exist. I've spent too much time on twitter today. I've seen a lot of discouragement and despair, lots of nasty anti-Catholic comments, but very little praise for this decision. https://twitter.com/ebruenig/status/1416172928287363072?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 03:40
|
|
|
I know that properly understanding the importance of things like this sometimes requires you to be an insider, but could someone at least try to explain to an outsider why performing the mass in Latin is so very important to some people, and why stopping them from performing the mass in Latin is so very important to others?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 09:57
|
|
|
My grandpa would be loving this if he were alive.  Blurred posted:I know that properly understanding the importance of things like this sometimes requires you to be an insider, but could someone at least try to explain to an outsider why performing the mass in Latin is so very important to some people, and why stopping them from performing the mass in Latin is so very important to others? From the Wikipedia article on Patriarch Nikon’s reforms that led to the “Old Believers” split from orthodoxy in Russia: quote:Today's readers might perceive these alterations as trivial, but the faithful of that time saw rituals and dogmas as strongly interconnected: church rituals had from the very beginning represented and symbolized doctrinal truth. Not a perfect analogy. For example I don’t see Biden persecuting future old believer Catholics for saying mass in Latin.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 14:03
|
|
|
See stuff like this just seems too close to this announcement to be coincidental. Why suddenly not allow Latin versions of NO right before all but banning TLM? Something smells. blurred posted:
A sense of ritual, tradition, and history in worship can help bring some people closer to the mystery that is their faith. For many people, there's a lot of meaning in worship that is closer to the way it was practiced for hundreds or even thousands of years. You also run into the issue that sometimes the Norvos Ordo mass has dealt with liturgical abuse, or went way too far with the "Spirit of Vatican II" (For example, nowhere in Vatican II does it say that altar rails had to be gotten rid of, and yet every church I went to as a little boy never had them. The first time I saw altar rails was at a Byzantine Catholic parish. Vatican II also strongly encourages chant over hymns, and yet I've never seen a Norvos Ordo parish use chant, etc., etc.). For many people, TLM is very beautiful and meaningful, it helps them worship better. I won't begrudge anyone that, even as I only attend Norvos Ordo. With that said, there have been radtrads who took it too far, declared all Norvos Ordo (And by extension, Vatican II), suspect or not valid, who proclaimed triumphalist hymns that "it was only a matter of time" before TLM completely replaced Norvos Ordo, etc., etc. They were always a small but loud minority who used the internet to amplify their stupidity. But it seems they fell into the crosshairs of Pope Francis and his advisors, and all attendees of TLM are getting punished now. TLM while still tiny, are/were experiencing huge growth compared to all other Catholic communities. And now the Pope has declared that they must stop (No new churches dedicated to them even). I've defended Pope Francis and his decision-making for most of his 8 year-Pontificate. After this rash decision, I really can't anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 15:08
|
|
|
Blurred posted:I know that properly understanding the importance of things like this sometimes requires you to be an insider, but could someone at least try to explain to an outsider why performing the mass in Latin is so very important to some people, and why stopping them from performing the mass in Latin is so very important to others? Here is Agatha Christie's opinion from 1971. Agatha Christie and 56 others posted:If some senseless decree were to order the total or partial destruction of basilicas or cathedrals, then obviously it would be the educated - whatever their personal beliefs - who would rise up in horror to oppose such a possibility. Now the fact is that basilicas and cathedrals were built so as to celebrate a rite which, until a few months ago, constituted a living tradition. We are referring to the Roman Catholic Mass. Yet, according to the latest information in Rome, there is a plan to obliterate that Mass by the end of the current year. One of the axioms of contemporary publicity, religious as well as secular, is that modern man in general, and intellectuals in particular, have become intolerant of all forms of tradition and are anxious to suppress them and put something else in their place. But, like many other affirmations of our publicity machines, this axiom is false. Today, as in times gone by, educated people are in the vanguard where recognition of the value of tradition in concerned, and are the first to raise the alarm when it is threatened. We are not at this moment considering the religious or spiritual experience of millions of individuals. The rite in question, in its magnificent Latin text, has also inspired a host of priceless achievements in the arts - not only mystical works, but works by poets, philosophers, musicians, architects, painters and sculptors in all countries and epochs. Thus, it belongs to universal culture as well as to churchmen and formal Christians. In the materialistic and technocratic civilisation that is increasingly threatening the life of mind and spirit in its original creative expression - the word - it seems particularly inhuman to deprive man of word-forms in one of their most grandiose manifestations. The signatories of this appeal, which is entirely ecumenical and non-political, have been drawn from every branch of modern culture in Europe and elsewhere. They wish to call to the attention of the Holy See, the appalling responsibility it would incur in the history of the human spirit were it to refuse to allow the Traditional Mass to survive, even though this survival took place side by side with other liturgical forms. Here is the SSPX's short explanation: sspx.org posted:The Catholic Faith is manifested through the Church's official prayers, the liturgy, of which the Mass is the most perfect expression. Since Vatican II the nature of the Mass has been significantly altered by a new rite. This Novus Ordo Missae, or new way of saying Mass, was introduced in 1969 by Pope Paul VI. As to why stopping this is important, here is Pope Francis' Letter from yesterday Pope Francis posted:But I am nonetheless saddened that the instrumental use of Missale Romanum of 1962 is often characterized by a rejection not only of the liturgical reform, but of the Vatican Council II itself, claiming, with unfounded and unsustainable assertions, that it betrayed the Tradition and the “true Church”. So it comes down to Vatican II, the council from 1962-1965.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 16:47
|
|
|
Blurred posted:I know that properly understanding the importance of things like this sometimes requires you to be an insider, but could someone at least try to explain to an outsider why performing the mass in Latin is so very important to some people, and why stopping them from performing the mass in Latin is so very important to others? If you check out a few Baptist churches, you'll sometimes find a "traditional" and a "contemporary" service. What it boils down to is one sings hymns written from about 1600-1900 using a piano and/or organ/orchestra, and one sings praise songs written after about 2010 using stage lighting and a band with a drum kit. In some sense it's a matter of taste, although certainly there's some theological implications and the occasional controversy. I think it's a mistake to think of the Latin mass issue in that way. It's not really about Latin. It's about something much deeper. Assume for the sake of argument that the Roman Catholic Church is the institution set up by God, handed to Peter by Jesus personally, infallible with regard to its teachings on faith and morals (and this is not just Papal infallibility), and therefore a constant repository of unchanging eternal truth. This is what the Church has taught about itself throughout history, and what its members are notionally supposed to believe today - and many of them absolutely do, certainly the traditionalists. You had popes like Pius X say "This stuff is true in exactly the sense we've said so over the centuries. Modernist people will try to change it or interpret it away. Don't let them, it's the synthesis of all heresies." With that assumption in mind, put yourself in the mind of a Catholic who believes this. Between 1962 and 1965, the Church convened the Vatican II council. It produce voluminous output that included writings that skirted right up the edge of changing some core Church teachings, particularly on ecumenicism but on many other things as well. The deep rewrite of the language and content of the mass was the most visible change to Catholics on a daily basis, but there was an impression - not an entirely inaccurate one - that whatever the Council claimed about itself, the "spirit" of the Council was being used to erode the actual foundational teachings of the Church. Sure, officially there was a "hermeneutic of continuity", but you don't need a phrase like "hermeneutic of continuity" if you actually have continuity. A few folks like Archbishop Lefebvre and Leonard Feeney and some others went absolutely ape over it, but to Catholics at large I think it was regarded as somewhat inside-baseball. "Ok, we use English now, that's cool". There were the occasional signs that something was a little awry (John Paul II kissing the Koran, etc), the decline in Mass attendance and Catholic culture in historical Catholic cultures, the eruption of sex abuse cases dating back to the post Vatican II era, and so on. But ok, it's not like the rest of the Christian world post-WWII was doing great. Then Francis was elected, and from day one he started throwing bombs. An atheist Italian journalist interviews him and claims that Francis doesn't believe in hell. Spokespeople deny it. Francis doesn't. He interprets away a key Catholic teaching divorce in a footnote. A group of bishops send him a formal document asking "WTF". He ignores it. He drops a key Catholic teaching on the death penalty. He drops the entire concept of just war in a footnote. He allows bishops to prostrate themselves before South American pagan idols. He lets the German bishops bless same-sex marriages. He says Catholics "breed like rabbits", and that that's bad. Any Catholic teaching or tradition seems up for grabs - except those promulgated at Vatican II. Be unsure about those teachings, or even try to accommodate the Council in a traditional way using licit means, and he descends from the throne with fire and fury. You can disagree with any of the characterizations above, but remember we're putting ourselves in the shoes of traditionalists. They're in the position of having to decide what it means that the man they're bound by church teaching to listen and obey is personally and vindictively taking away the licit means that they can be Catholic as the Church has known it for centuries. So it's not purely that Latin sounds cool. It's that Francis is in their view slowly and systematically (but always in a just barely deniably ambiguous way) burying the faith passed down by the Apostles, and burying them in the process.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
While I would normally incline toward "let people worship as they choose" I wouldn't know how to begin taking a side on this one (not least because I've already taken a rather different side as an Anabaptist Protestant). But I can (and have) offer up my prayers for everyone caught in the middle of this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
Man, is this what it feels like to be super pissed off at Pope Francis? I’m so sorry, all, this sucks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 21:59
|
|
|
This seems like one of those things where if you're catholic you understand immediately why everyone is so upset, and if you're not catholic you still kinda don't get it even after it's explained to you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:16
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:This seems like one of those things where if you're catholic you understand immediately why everyone is so upset, and if you're not catholic you still kinda don't get it even after it's explained to you. Yeah, like I think I've wrapped my head around it now, but only intellectually, and it's still quite hard not to be all "Oh, okay, but have you considered just doing services in Latin anyway, it's not like he's the Boss of All Churches...oh, he is, right, um..."
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:21
|
|
|
While I am often exasperated by folk who deny the validly of Vatican II, I can't think this was the best way to stop the growing split from getting worse. I'm sad that this is hurting people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:24
|
|
|
If God created man in "his own image" how come the majority of us are so messed up? Sounds like He created us for His entertainment. Well, at least He has a sense of humor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:49
|
|
|
Spacegrass posted:If God created man in "his own image" how come the majority of us are so messed up?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:58
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:This seems like one of those things where if you're catholic you understand immediately why everyone is so upset, and if you're not catholic you still kinda' don't get it even after it's explained to you. Think of it this way. You got a boss who on very important issues at work is constantly vague and always seems to be contradicting company policy with whatever he says, and refusing to clarify while one of his yes-men is always following his vague announcements with "oh well he didn't mean that, this is what he means", leading to a lot of workplace confusion and low morale. There's also a group of employees who are constantly breaking the rules and could probably be fired over it who the boss seems to turn a blind eye to. Then there's a group of workers who work pretty hard but don't see eye to eye with the boss on all things, and some of them grumble way too much about it and how it was better under the old boss. The boss drops the hammer on them every chance he gets, talking poo poo, treating them like they're the biggest problem in the office, while the first group laughs about it in the lunch room. If I was a decent writer I'd have some funny examples or anecdotes to make this analogy sound better. SpaceGrass posted:If God created man in "his own image" how come the majority of us are so messed up? The Christian answer would be sin, in super-short term.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 00:32
|
|
|
Spacegrass posted:If God created man in "his own image" how come the majority of us are so messed up? I always do enjoy this scene https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jARp24AJWLk But seriously, Original Sin covers this for Catholics and some Protestants. Not sure how other Christians deal with it. "To consider the world in its length and breadth, its various history, the many races of man, their starts, their fortunes, their mutual alienation, their conflicts; and then their ways, habits, governments, forms of worship; their enterprise, their aimless courses, their random achievements and acquirements, the impotent conclusion of long-standing facts, the tokens so faint and broken of a superintending design, the blind evolution of what turn out to be great powers or truths, the progress of things as if from unreasoning elements, not towards final causes; the greatness and littleness of man, his far reaching aims, his short duration, the curtain hung over his futurity; the disappointments of life, the defeat of good, the success of evil, physical pain, mental anguish, the prevalence and intensity of sin, the pervading idolatries, the dreary hopeless irreligion; that condition of the whole race, so fearfully yet so exactly described in the Apostle's words, 'having no hope and without God in the world,' all this is a vision to dizzy and appal; and inflicts upon the mind the sense of a profound mystery, which is absolutely beyond human solution And what shall be said of this heart-piercing, reason bewildering fact? I can only answer that either there is no Creator, or this living society of men is in a true sense discarded from his presence .. . if there be a God, since there is God, the human race is implicated in some terrible aboriginal calamity. It is out of joint with the purposes of its Creator.1 ~St. John Henry Newman
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 00:57
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:While I am often exasperated by folk who deny the validly of Vatican II, I can't think this was the best way to stop the growing split from getting worse. I'm sad that this is hurting people. Yeah. I get the reasoning, a growing (in volume, if not numbers) group of hyperconservative traditionalists still arguing against the validity of Vatican II sixty years down the road is a threat, but there's a lot of room for collateral damage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 01:04
|
|
|
The situation reminds me of what our church has been going through for a few decades now, after the priesthood was opened for women in 1986. At the core of the issue was and is an interpretation of certain parts of the Bible. Some theological interpretations say that gender equality applies to priesthood. Other (traditional) interpretations arrive to the conclusion that it is a matter of different responsibilities of sexes/genders (not sure which is correct here) issued by God and almost like with biological differences between sexes: being different or having different responsibilities is not the same as being unequal. Equality is certainly a hugely important thing in the Bible and neither side of the issue denies that. Anyway, I'm not going to dwell on that. That's just background information. My point is, when our church decided that the more modern interpretation was also more correct, it was also recognized that the traditional interpretation is not evil and people who believe differently should have a home in the church. However, in a few decades we are in a situation where it's super hard for male-only-priesthood people to participate in a communion at all. A large number of priests, if not a majority, are women and it is illegal to arrange work responsibilities by gender so there can be no reliably male-priest-only services. An issue, which both sides agree should not be very divisive, had led to spiritual homelessness of a large number of very active people who used to love their church and still would like to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 07:52
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:While I am often exasperated by folk who deny the validly of Vatican II, I can't think this was the best way to stop the growing split from getting worse. I'm sad that this is hurting people. I agree this is a broad stroke with collateral damage, but I feel like something had to be done about the issue. The Catholic Church seems to be suffering the same problem as a lot of the world these days, conservatism is pushing into reactionary behavior into outright fascist or fascist adjacent positions, and maybe this is just the position of an outsider here but the number of people using the Latin mass out of mere respect for old tradition seem pretty badly outnumbered by the jerks using it to try to stealthy worm some very non-Christian attitudes into the Catholic Church under the cloak of such traditions. It sucks, but when symbols become profaned or held up to stand for something it’s supposed to oppose, the disapproval will hit even those who use it rightly. And right now, I think the primary symbolism of the Latin Mass has been twisted into “give cover for spreading right-wing BS and hostility to any Pope who won’t be regressive”, so I think the Pope has a responsibility not to let it be spread when what it’s doing is giving a “legitimate” veneer of respectability to that attitude. Terrible but not the first tradition fascists have ruined.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 19:28
|
|
|
That's like banning doc martens to deal with Nazis. Totally ineffective. Imo all this does is hurt people caught in the crossfire. If people are using tridentine mass performatively, I doubt pope Francis telling them to stop is actually going to effect much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:48 |
|
|
So is this saying that a mass given in Latin is invalid now? Was this like a retroactive change? This confuses me. Like if I have my facts straight here: There is an original Latin form of the Mass which was given in basically the same way for yea so long a time, with any local variations being trivial accidents. Vatican II said "Start giving the Mass in your local language." There was dispute here due to the change and there had been some flexibility on the use of the Latin Mass lately. (Perhaps this is the Tridentine Mass?) Pope Francis's recent comments on the matter seem to be walking that back. Were both Masses officially held to be like, sacramentally valid all this time?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 19:55
|
|