I agree. Thanks, Luke, for taking the trouble to report on it. It shows how seriously some Catholics take their religion.
In 2015 I was in the Old Believers' Church in Daugavpils in Latvia. It was the only time that I have ever been inside an Old Believers' Church. A choir practice was in progress... Until a ferocious row erupted. A choir member whipped off his robe, threw it on the floor and stormed out. I guess that was the sort of passion which kept the Old Believers alive in the face of merciless persecution. Would that we were all so zealous.
It's rather humorous that the world's most violent and contentious Liturgy War has Pope Francis on the side of traditionalism and ad orientem worship while the schismatics are progressives and want versus populum.
Cardinal Gregory said that "Tradition dies a slow death, sometimes a bloody death" when speaking of liturgical changes at Catholic U of America.
Hopefully, the huge Syro-Malabar Church will remain united to Peter, but violence has been and seemingly will remain a part of this potential (if not already real) fracture in the Church.
Fire and excommunication, just like 1054.
And like the TLM crisis, a complete unforced, unnecessary and uncalled for error all around.
And again, trademark Pillar. Solid, faithful, accurate, no sides taken journalism. Why I subscribe. Thanks for not telling me who hates the Pope, who's conservative, liberal...
I can’t help but wonder- are there other differences between the two liturgies beyond the orientation? Would it be an “equivalent” change to requiring the Novus Ordo to turn as orientem for the liturgy of Eucharist or is it closer to trying to bring the TLM and the Novus Ordo together in a unified manner?
Maybe it's not "like" or "equivalent". Maybe it's just what's at issue in the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, and must be understood in its own terms or not at all.
I am not now and never have been a religion reporter. But a religion editor I knew insisted that comparisons to a sort of generic, average Christianity were NOT helpful, and any faith has to be explained in its own terms.
In my opinion, business reporting is easier. So good job, Pillar.
As someone who once again thinks this is a worthy compromise (and actually favors all out ad orientem)...
What if they tell the Bishop to get stuffed? And what if it is actually very hard to satisfy the pastoral needs of the archeparchy when most their priests are now going to be in schism?
If they are strictly in schism by declaration of the Vatican, but do not actually want to separate and start saying Mass on their own, I expect it will be very hard on the laity, which will generate pressure on all parties to come to a solution.
If they agree that they are in schism, and intend to run with this, then they'll keep providing Mass, only they'll be schismatic, not Catholic Mass, and the laity who wish to remain faithful will have a very hard time sorting through it all.
From the looks of the pictures, the laity are involved in the discussions about what to do with the ultimatum.
Well the Vatican has a pretty wide berth on how to define how you are in communion with it. That can be stupid and counterproductive, but the top has a wide berth for good reasons.
Same principle if it was the sincere belief of the synod. I just think we should all look before we leap.
I agree that the Pope (and by extension the curia with his approval) gets to decide if what someone is doing constitutes schism. But they declare the status, not the intentions of everyone involved. Hopefully most of the people involved are saying something along the lines of "Whoops! Did NOT mean for it to go that far." Rather than "Oh, they finally figured out we want nothing to do with them. That'll make this easier."
Part of the timing is probably so the deadline can be the feast day of St. Thomas. And my birthday! So please, guys, don’t go into schism—as a gift to me, if nothing else.
The passions that are raised by this are a mystery to me. The change happened within living memory! And it was against their ancient tradition, not in line with it! Why are people ready to schism over this?
It would be ad orientem. I think it is in one of Luke’s early explainers on this topic. Versus populum came with Vatican II until the 1970s when the re-ore tialisation of eastern Churches actually in Vatican II picked up real steam and so the ‘uniform’ version was negotiated.
I get the sense that these letters are not helping matters. Are these bishops talking directly to their disaffected priests and flock? Are the disaffected priests and flock giving their bishops the time of day and not just blowing them off and complaining they’re not being listened to? How the heck is anyone supposed to ‘come to Jesus’ on this when it doesn’t seem that the opposing sides can even be in the same room?
The ideal outcome is people do what they’re told, even through gritted teeth and offer it up, but that takes at least one ounce of trust. I get the sense that that ounce is lacking.
Thanks for your reporting on this issue, Luke. I'm not sure what I think about it all, but I find it interesting.
I agree. Thanks, Luke, for taking the trouble to report on it. It shows how seriously some Catholics take their religion.
In 2015 I was in the Old Believers' Church in Daugavpils in Latvia. It was the only time that I have ever been inside an Old Believers' Church. A choir practice was in progress... Until a ferocious row erupted. A choir member whipped off his robe, threw it on the floor and stormed out. I guess that was the sort of passion which kept the Old Believers alive in the face of merciless persecution. Would that we were all so zealous.
https://www.visitdaugavpils.lv/en/turisma-objekts/baznicu-kalns/
It's rather humorous that the world's most violent and contentious Liturgy War has Pope Francis on the side of traditionalism and ad orientem worship while the schismatics are progressives and want versus populum.
Cardinal Gregory said that "Tradition dies a slow death, sometimes a bloody death" when speaking of liturgical changes at Catholic U of America.
Hopefully, the huge Syro-Malabar Church will remain united to Peter, but violence has been and seemingly will remain a part of this potential (if not already real) fracture in the Church.
Fire and excommunication, just like 1054.
And like the TLM crisis, a complete unforced, unnecessary and uncalled for error all around.
And again, trademark Pillar. Solid, faithful, accurate, no sides taken journalism. Why I subscribe. Thanks for not telling me who hates the Pope, who's conservative, liberal...
Thanks for saying clearly what happened.
I can’t help but wonder- are there other differences between the two liturgies beyond the orientation? Would it be an “equivalent” change to requiring the Novus Ordo to turn as orientem for the liturgy of Eucharist or is it closer to trying to bring the TLM and the Novus Ordo together in a unified manner?
Maybe it's not "like" or "equivalent". Maybe it's just what's at issue in the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, and must be understood in its own terms or not at all.
I am not now and never have been a religion reporter. But a religion editor I knew insisted that comparisons to a sort of generic, average Christianity were NOT helpful, and any faith has to be explained in its own terms.
In my opinion, business reporting is easier. So good job, Pillar.
All I can think about this is how much the devil must love it.
Yes
As someone who once again thinks this is a worthy compromise (and actually favors all out ad orientem)...
What if they tell the Bishop to get stuffed? And what if it is actually very hard to satisfy the pastoral needs of the archeparchy when most their priests are now going to be in schism?
If they are strictly in schism by declaration of the Vatican, but do not actually want to separate and start saying Mass on their own, I expect it will be very hard on the laity, which will generate pressure on all parties to come to a solution.
If they agree that they are in schism, and intend to run with this, then they'll keep providing Mass, only they'll be schismatic, not Catholic Mass, and the laity who wish to remain faithful will have a very hard time sorting through it all.
From the looks of the pictures, the laity are involved in the discussions about what to do with the ultimatum.
Well the Vatican has a pretty wide berth on how to define how you are in communion with it. That can be stupid and counterproductive, but the top has a wide berth for good reasons.
Same principle if it was the sincere belief of the synod. I just think we should all look before we leap.
I agree that the Pope (and by extension the curia with his approval) gets to decide if what someone is doing constitutes schism. But they declare the status, not the intentions of everyone involved. Hopefully most of the people involved are saying something along the lines of "Whoops! Did NOT mean for it to go that far." Rather than "Oh, they finally figured out we want nothing to do with them. That'll make this easier."
Part of the timing is probably so the deadline can be the feast day of St. Thomas. And my birthday! So please, guys, don’t go into schism—as a gift to me, if nothing else.
Come, Holy Spirit. Bring your peace that surpasses all understanding. Your Church needs it. Amen.
The passions that are raised by this are a mystery to me. The change happened within living memory! And it was against their ancient tradition, not in line with it! Why are people ready to schism over this?
which is the more traditional way in this rite? versus populum or ad orientem?
It would be ad orientem. I think it is in one of Luke’s early explainers on this topic. Versus populum came with Vatican II until the 1970s when the re-ore tialisation of eastern Churches actually in Vatican II picked up real steam and so the ‘uniform’ version was negotiated.
I get the sense that these letters are not helping matters. Are these bishops talking directly to their disaffected priests and flock? Are the disaffected priests and flock giving their bishops the time of day and not just blowing them off and complaining they’re not being listened to? How the heck is anyone supposed to ‘come to Jesus’ on this when it doesn’t seem that the opposing sides can even be in the same room?
The ideal outcome is people do what they’re told, even through gritted teeth and offer it up, but that takes at least one ounce of trust. I get the sense that that ounce is lacking.