Out of respect for you, I will continue to be open and honest with you regarding our discipline and Rites, even if it means being self-critical. However, please realize none of this has anything to do with infallible doctrines to be held for all times.
At what level, if any, do you believe that the NO mass becomes a travesty, destructive of The Faith?
I do not deny that it already is, in some respect. It is well-known that many Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence of the Eucharist. Many have little respect within the church nave - seen by continued talking and immodest dress in front of our Lord and Savior. There is often a non-chalant attitude towards the Divine Liturgy.
Now, is this BECAUSE of the NO Mass? Or is this because of other, extenuating circumstance? Such as poor catechisis, poor stewardship by priests and bishops, the invasion of modernism and liberalism into the faithful, and so forth? I believe it is all of the above. The NO Mass ITSELF do not contribute to a lack of respect - but the symbolism is not as powerfully retentative to the mind, when compared to a Latin Mass (which the Pope has said a priest does not need permission to conduct).
Jo, there has been no influx of fundy Protestants into my town in the past 40-50 years. Those Protestant assemblies are filled with former Catholics who have left the Roman Church since Vatican II.
Kolo, it is hard to say whether the reason is BECAUSE of the NO Mass! I have read a number of reports on WHY Catholics leave the Church. An extensive study was done in Australia, and few people list "they took away the Latin Mass" as the reason for their falling away and taking up Protestantism. The reason is usually because they do not find the Church as meaningful in their lives. We know this is, in effect, a cop-out due their lack of education. However, the fact remains that these people are not experiencing Christ as they should, inside OR outside of the doors of their church. They are often bored with Mass (a distinct possibility if you don't understand the language!)
I don't know where you live, so I cannot make comments on WHY Protestantism has not spread throughout your community. I would presume that Orthodoxy is largely a cultural way of life for people who live in Russia or Greece and "converting" to Protestantism is, in effect, a rejection of your culture.
Catholicism does not have a strong cultural history in the US, with the exceptions of where Polish and Italian and Mexican immigrants have settled and have retained this "Catholic ghetto" mentality. Even this is in decline because the US is a mobile culture. People do not live and die within 10 miles of their birth place. I live in the opposite corner of the USA, THOUSANDS of miles from where I was born and raised. My family is spread to the four winds. When people move away, out of the "Catholic ghetto", it is difficult to retain those culture ties you were raised with, including your religion. Places like Serbia and Russia do not have that cultural mobility, so it is not surprising to see people born and die Orthodox. I hightly doubt it is because of their "rite".
Is that your modern “communion of people gathered together in God’s name”? Is that how you cater to “People of the modern culture who want ‘participation’”?
I don't have an answer. But I do not believe returning to old Rites is necessarily the answer. Because the problem is deeper than one hour a week, the Rite is really only a small issue.
Jo, with all due respect, your Eucharistic theology of off. Those who approach the Holy Mysteries unworthily, eat and drink to their own condemnation!
When Paul wrote those words, was he speaking about the correct Rites that should be practiced at Corinth? Was he speaking about the Greek or Byzantium Rites of Divine Liturgy being done "just so"? Or was he speaking about the recipient being free from sin and understanding that they were uniting to Christ through this participation of the ultimate sacrifice offered to the Father in heaven?
And the priests who preside over these abominations carry an even greater condemnation as they are charged with being the guardians of the Holy Mysteries.
I presume you are not refering to the licity NO Mass, but rather, the abuses of the NO Mass, such as ridiculous clown masses. I agree with the "clown mass" priests are in danger of sending their souls to hell. Those who scandalize the children of God are in grave danger. Such priests, unfortunately, are more concerned with putting on a show than conducting Sacred Liturgy.
There is nothing magical about the liturgies or the consecration by the power of the Holy Spirit, the derivation of “hocus pocus” to the contrary notwithstanding. Do you think that if the Roman liturgy had maintained an ancient continuity, it would have been viewed by the modern pagans and heretics in the pews as magic? Where does this idea come from?
I refer to the IDEA that unless one does everything "just as it was done" 1700 years ago, it is not a "true" form of worship to the Almighty God. Rites are changeable and are INTENDED for the People of God to attach the meanings of symbols to realities unseen. Since symbolic meanings CAN change, the rites must be changeable so that people are more readily able to experience the Risen Christ. Such formulas from 300 AD are not the only manner by which we can experience Christ. A symbol does not necessarily retain a meaning for 1700 years, nor does it deny that a different symbol may be BETTER.
Regards
“Now, is this BECAUSE of the NO Mass? Or is this because of other, extenuating circumstance? Such as poor catechisis, poor stewardship by priests and bishops, the invasion of modernism and liberalism into the faithful, and so forth?”
The NO liturgy so far as I can see teaches nothing but how important the people are. The praying has become defective and thus the teaching. You speak of catechesis and yet the greatest tool of catechesis are the various liturgies and devotions which Rome scraped because they wanted something they thought would be “relevant”.
“I don’t know where you live, so I cannot make comments on WHY Protestantism has not spread throughout your community. I would presume that Orthodoxy is largely a cultural way of life for people who live in Russia or Greece and “converting” to Protestantism is, in effect, a rejection of your culture.”
I don’t live in Russia or Greece; I live right here in America, about one mile from where I was born. The reason Protestantism has made no inroads into our Orthodox community is that it has absolutely nothing to offer us. Its that simple!
“Places like Serbia and Russia do not have that cultural mobility, so it is not surprising to see people born and die Orthodox. I hightly doubt it is because of their “rite”.”
But in fact it is because of the “rite” in many ways. The “rite” is where we learn The Faith in the way that it has been successfully taught for 1700 years at least.