Schism in the church

[Anonymous]

I have been hoping and praying that the "fewer and truer" Catholics schism off for years. Good riddance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Pope Leo is not going to be as "liberal" as Francis, and most importantly, he's not going to be as intentionally divisive.

Not sure how or why anyone things Francis was divisive. You have to be a pretty rigid conservative to think that.

Pope Francis established many impediments to celebrating the traditional Latin mass. If Pope Leo removes those, he will be good with the vast majority of the more religiously conservative wing of Catholics who simply want the liturgy they prefer back.

IT'S BEEN 60 YEARS - what are you even talking about? The only people that could truly prefer that liturgy are in their 70's and 80's, and 90's. The rest have been brought along by these sticks in the mud.

Unbelievable.

Actually, it's the boomers brought up post-Vatican II who tend to be anti-traditional liturgy.

It's the younger people who are attracted to it. Pope Benedict XVI (pope from 2005 to 2013) loosened the strictures put in earlier on the Tridentine mass, exposing it to newer generations, who have become attached. Pope Francis re-instated the strictures and more, alienating this group.

Pope Leo will have the support of this group if the only thing he does is dial back the policy on the traditional mass to the days of Benedict.

I just looked up stats on this - about 4% of US Catholic churches offer the Tridentine mass. I get that you have found this thread and are now going to present a decidedly minoritarian practice that most US Catholics have never been exposed to or participated in as some kind of movement, but it's simply not true and is blatant propaganda.

I'm sure the white Christian nationalists will make great bedfellows until they aren't.

No one wants Mass in Latin. Please stop with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Pope Leo is not going to be as "liberal" as Francis, and most importantly, he's not going to be as intentionally divisive.

Not sure how or why anyone things Francis was divisive. You have to be a pretty rigid conservative to think that.

Pope Francis established many impediments to celebrating the traditional Latin mass. If Pope Leo removes those, he will be good with the vast majority of the more religiously conservative wing of Catholics who simply want the liturgy they prefer back.

IT'S BEEN 60 YEARS - what are you even talking about? The only people that could truly prefer that liturgy are in their 70's and 80's, and 90's. The rest have been brought along by these sticks in the mud.

Unbelievable.

Actually, it's the boomers brought up post-Vatican II who tend to be anti-traditional liturgy.

It's the younger people who are attracted to it. Pope Benedict XVI (pope from 2005 to 2013) loosened the strictures put in earlier on the Tridentine mass, exposing it to newer generations, who have become attached. Pope Francis re-instated the strictures and more, alienating this group.

Pope Leo will have the support of this group if the only thing he does is dial back the policy on the traditional mass to the days of Benedict.

I just looked up stats on this - about 4% of US Catholic churches offer the Tridentine mass. I get that you have found this thread and are now going to present a decidedly minoritarian practice that most US Catholics have never been exposed to or participated in as some kind of movement, but it's simply not true and is blatant propaganda.

I'm sure the white Christian nationalists will make great bedfellows until they aren't.

No one wants Mass in Latin. Please stop with this.

Why do you care if some Catholics want mass in Latin? (And yes, there are many all over the world who would rather have a Latin mass.)

The Syriac Catholic Church uses Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic Jesus spoke, in their liturgies even though the vernacular of the congregations is Arabic and Syriac has not been spoken for hundreds of years in most of the locations where the Syriac liturgy is used.

Should the Vatican force them to switch their liturgy to Arabic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Pope Leo is not going to be as "liberal" as Francis, and most importantly, he's not going to be as intentionally divisive.

Not sure how or why anyone things Francis was divisive. You have to be a pretty rigid conservative to think that.

Pope Francis established many impediments to celebrating the traditional Latin mass. If Pope Leo removes those, he will be good with the vast majority of the more religiously conservative wing of Catholics who simply want the liturgy they prefer back.

IT'S BEEN 60 YEARS - what are you even talking about? The only people that could truly prefer that liturgy are in their 70's and 80's, and 90's. The rest have been brought along by these sticks in the mud.

Unbelievable.

Actually, it's the boomers brought up post-Vatican II who tend to be anti-traditional liturgy.

It's the younger people who are attracted to it. Pope Benedict XVI (pope from 2005 to 2013) loosened the strictures put in earlier on the Tridentine mass, exposing it to newer generations, who have become attached. Pope Francis re-instated the strictures and more, alienating this group.

Pope Leo will have the support of this group if the only thing he does is dial back the policy on the traditional mass to the days of Benedict.

I just looked up stats on this - about 4% of US Catholic churches offer the Tridentine mass. I get that you have found this thread and are now going to present a decidedly minoritarian practice that most US Catholics have never been exposed to or participated in as some kind of movement, but it's simply not true and is blatant propaganda.

I'm sure the white Christian nationalists will make great bedfellows until they aren't.

No one wants Mass in Latin. Please stop with this.

How old are you? I am 39 and a lot of Catholics my age DO want it. Honestly I think some of the men enjoyed "Boondock Saints" too much in college. Or maybe they think it brings them closer to the religion of their European ancestors as opposed to the boomer-led, utterly American guitar masses many of us are stuck with. I don't necessarily want a Latin mass but I really wish thr music could be overhauled!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Pope Leo is not going to be as "liberal" as Francis, and most importantly, he's not going to be as intentionally divisive.

Not sure how or why anyone things Francis was divisive. You have to be a pretty rigid conservative to think that.

Pope Francis established many impediments to celebrating the traditional Latin mass. If Pope Leo removes those, he will be good with the vast majority of the more religiously conservative wing of Catholics who simply want the liturgy they prefer back.

IT'S BEEN 60 YEARS - what are you even talking about? The only people that could truly prefer that liturgy are in their 70's and 80's, and 90's. The rest have been brought along by these sticks in the mud.

Unbelievable.

Actually, it's the boomers brought up post-Vatican II who tend to be anti-traditional liturgy.

It's the younger people who are attracted to it. Pope Benedict XVI (pope from 2005 to 2013) loosened the strictures put in earlier on the Tridentine mass, exposing it to newer generations, who have become attached. Pope Francis re-instated the strictures and more, alienating this group.

Pope Leo will have the support of this group if the only thing he does is dial back the policy on the traditional mass to the days of Benedict.

I just looked up stats on this - about 4% of US Catholic churches offer the Tridentine mass. I get that you have found this thread and are now going to present a decidedly minoritarian practice that most US Catholics have never been exposed to or participated in as some kind of movement, but it's simply not true and is blatant propaganda.

I'm sure the white Christian nationalists will make great bedfellows until they aren't.

No one wants Mass in Latin. Please stop with this.

Why do you care if some Catholics want mass in Latin? (And yes, there are many all over the world who would rather have a Latin mass.)

The Syriac Catholic Church uses Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic Jesus spoke, in their liturgies even though the vernacular of the congregations is Arabic and Syriac has not been spoken for hundreds of years in most of the locations where the Syriac liturgy is used.

Should the Vatican force them to switch their liturgy to Arabic?

I do not care if you want a mass in Latin. I studied Latin for years and might go and enjoy it, too. My dad is a Latin scholar and would love it.

But this is not the direction the vast majority of Catholics want to go in or need. The PP who said 4% of Catholic parishes offer masses in Latin neglected to follow up and say that, even in those parishes, most masses are in the vernacular. English, Spanish, Vietnames, Tagalog. People want to understand! People need to understand in order to feel connected.

Please, just get up and go and take your fewer and truer and all of Opus Dei with you. I have an Opus Dei acquaintance who didn't like Pope Francis and said that the Jesuits were not real Catholics. Go away and leave the rest of us with the Jesuits and popes who care about migrants and human suffering.

This is two popes in a row you don't like. Please move on.

[Anonymous]

Without even bothering to read all this, I can tell you this. I’m a 51 year old lapsed Catholic and since I was a kid social justice Catholics and conservative values (read: anti-abortion) Catholics have been duking it out for control of the church. You can sit in two different churches in the same town and have zero idea from the homily that they practice the same religion. John Paul 2 was conservative values. Benedict was an empty shirt. Francis was social justice. Let’s see what Leo does.

[jsteele]

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1275618.page