Posted on 06/05/2021 9:56:48 PM PDT by ebb tide
Before leaving office in 2013, Pope Benedict XVI mused about the dangers of a horizontal church, one that is more preoccupied with this life than the next one. He decried the “hermeneutic of politics” that had lowered the vision of churchmen and convinced them “that the pre-conciliar Church was finished.” He might as well have been describing his successor. The relentless focus of Pope Francis on temporal politics and contempt for tradition conform to that view perfectly. His pontificate has resembled a U-turn, taking the Church back to the tumult and trendiness immediately following Vatican II.
Pope Francis imbibed that period’s politicizing and liberalizing spirit and shares none of the sympathies of his predecessors for the pre-Vatican II Church. He sees the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI as years of lamentable conservative retrenchment. What they considered a problem, the Church’s drift from tradition, he regards as a solution.
So it is no surprise that recent reports from Rome suggest that he may soon limit access to the traditional Latin Mass. Its otherworldly liturgy is out of step with his worldly conception of the Church. Numerous churchmen have noted his dismay with the persistent interest in the old liturgy. It is no secret that he opposed Summorum Pontificum, the 2007 order from Pope Benedict XVI authorizing wider use of the traditional Latin Mass.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Ping
Francis is often described as a Christian humanist, which is a conflict of terms. Humanism is an atheistic ideology which views humans as animals with no spiritual aspect. From a Christian perspective, it’s almost a demonic ideology.
Or a heretical one.
If people prefer the traditional Latin Tridentine Mass, why deny them? What harm could there be in letting them have it?
PS, you have my sympathies for having this pinko pope.
Good questions. If a company were selling soft drinks or toothpaste or cigarettes, and they discontinued one of their most popular venerable brands, and then, due to customer demand, they brought back the old brand, and it steadily regained market share, would they try to kill it off again? Any executive who suggested doing that would likely be fired.
But what if the goal is not to grow the company? What if the goal is to destroy the company because the loyalties of the CEO and a number of executives are actually to a different, competing company?
PREFER???
Isn't there just ONE right way to do things?
Yes, God's way. Since the Church is nearly two centuries old and only recently did Al Gore invent the internet, very early on, the Gospel would be preached throughout the world and converts would be introduced to the liturgy. Communication being what it was, much of it was in the local language. As things developed in the dominant empire the language was, of course, Latin.
We are fortunate to still have many minor Rites which have been passed down for generations and are still in use. All of the Rites worship Almighty God with minor variations in prayers and customs.
If rigidity hides insecurity as the pope says, all the more reason people need the TLM.
Because:
“The ancient liturgy doesn’t lend itself to left-wing politics.”
(Constantinople developed from Antioch which developed from Jerusalem, if I understand correctly.)
Within the Roman liturgical tradition, there are variants like the "Anglican Use," the Tridentine Mass (aka "TLM"), and the 1970 Roman Missal (Novus Ordo).
So, no, there's not one right way. There's a tree with five main branches, and then some little branches off of those.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.