Liturgy shouldn't be a source of division but unless it's done in lockstep it's wrong? And yet there are 10 canons in the Latin rite without anyone going ballistic. Some Masses are in Latin and some in English. Some are ad orientem and some are ad populum. We are still a unified rite with unity in diversity. If we can do it so can they.
Liturgy shouldn't be a source of division but unless it's done in lockstep it's wrong? And yet there are 10 canons in the Latin rite without anyone going ballistic. Some Masses are in Latin and some in English. Some are ad orientem and some are ad populum. We are still a unified rite with unity in diversity. If we can do it so can they.
Or is this about wanting the laity to pay, pray, and obey while the clergy do everything else, otherwise known as clericalism?
Liturgy shouldn't be a source of division but unless it's done in lockstep it's wrong? And yet there are 10 canons in the Latin rite without anyone going ballistic. Some Masses are in Latin and some in English. Some are ad orientem and some are ad populum. We are still a unified rite with unity in diversity. If we can do it so can they.
Or is this about wanting the laity to pay, pray, and obey while the clergy do everything else, otherwise known as clericalism?