Actually, I think the Anglican use parishes have some of the most beautiful and reverent liturgy I have seen. I would actually like to thank them, rather than blame them. 1) for doing a good translation of the TLM into English; and 2) for having beautiful music.Indeed. And all bets are off when the Latin is translated into English. You can blame the Anglicans for that.
Why would my opinion as a Roman Catholic, on an indult that concerns a Roman Rite offend you ?
I would love to attend an Anglican Use parish somedayActually, I think the Anglican use parishes have some of the most beautiful and reverent liturgy I have seen. I would actually like to thank them, rather than blame them. 1) for doing a good translation of the TLM into English; and 2) for having beautiful music.
Thatās one of the things Iām trying to understand. Was the worst of it in the past ?
Thanks, Iāll check it out.
First, receiving standing is not an indult. CITH is, standing isnāt. In fact, its an established norm by virtue of the authority given to the Episcopal Conferences by the GIRM.
Sorry, that wasnāt my point. Iām just trying to make you see that when you comment about the practices in the Roman Catholic Church, your comments should be only within that context. And thus you should see our comments about Latin practices in Eastern Churches only within that context, the context of Eastern Churches. We donāt want kneeling on Sundays in our Churches, but I donāt think anyone here would think twice about kneeling when attending Mass. Any āanti-Latinā comments here only pertains to practices in the Eastern Church. As a Latin Traditionalist, you should understand that we ourselves want to adhere to our own traditions as much as you would like to adhere to yours.
Probably so. Iād like to go, but Iām not sure what is in town here.
To put it simply, authentic Eastern Spirituality generally means having an identical practice with that of the Eastern Orthodox.
Thanks for the reply, I have never heard the EC churches spoken of in a bad light in person. Even on various RC trad forums, I donāt recall such. But I believe it because Iāve seen it discussed here.
Unfortunately, no. While the Vatican has been supportive of the Eastern Rites recovering their own traditions, there are many other factions that keep preventing the Eastern Rites from functioning as full Churches rather than subordinate Churches of the Roman Church, especially here in the diaspora. For example, the issue of married priests. The dominant Roman Catholic Bishops always prefer that priests remain celibate even for Eastern Churches. But why? That is not the tradition of the Eastern Churches. So now there is an imbalance. The Eastern Churches are told to reclaim their traditions, yet are being told at the same time that we canāt practice them.
Its a long history and it differs from each particular Church. Really, to p(name removed by moderator)oint every instance is a huge discussion in itself. Some instances of Latinizations were a result of missionary efforts by Roman Catholic priests on Orthodox lands. This is why uniatism has been condemned. What happens is those who accept the proselytizing of the RC missionaries became Latinized Eastern Catholics. So in a sense they became a hybrid of Eastern and Western. The idea of the Roman Popes is to have everything Orthodox kept the way they are, but the Church is in union with Rome.
You know my stance on RC traditionalism. I may be biased but I would say its a bit different, but also a bit the same. Latinizations generally wouldnāt be a bad thing had it not been forced. For example, its not as if every priest in the Byzantine Rite is married. We have many celibate priests. Otherwise where would we get our bishops? But to force a celibacy rule on a Byzantine Churches of course is wrong. I find that Eastern spirituality is more open to new things. For example, adopting the vernacular is not a big deal in the East (generally). As long as the decision to do so is made by the particular Church herself and not by another Church (Byzantine, Latin, or whatever Rite), then thereās no fuss about it. In fact, in the Ukrainian Church, we have adopted the Sacred Heart and called the icon, āChrist the lover of mankind.ā The devotions itself is a bit different, thereās no exposition of the Blessed Sacrament on first Fridays. But there is a moleben (prayer service). Its very Byzantine, but the origin is Latin. That is organic adoption of a Latin devotion.
Sadly I feel that way. Its not as if I wasnāt Roman Catholic for much of my life. But those whom I know who are still Roman Catholic think Iāve become a Protestant
Even my mom whoās a devout Roman Catholic 
Thats kinda sad.
Noted, thanks.
I keep hearing this, but as someone who prefers Polish Mass to an English Mass, I would say these two would be more in communion with each other, though obviously they will never be āequalā because of the different nuances in the language.
But Christ did. There was only one Last Supper and there was only one Crucifixion. There should be only one way of looking at it but each one of us seems to have a different take.I suppose thatās only human nature.
That depends on a variety of things, including which Church(es) one is speaking about. Iāll spare the world a repetition here, but a search of some of my past posts will show a number of examples.
Simple answer to that one: Rome. Perhaps not forcibly, but the āinfluenceā (āpressureā might be better) was there nonetheless. Itās interesting, though, that in recent times, Rome has stepped back from exerting any such influence, and in fact has promoted the restoration of traditional practices in the East and Orient. The sad thing is that some Churches (mainly among the Orientals) have twisted that in a way that has caused an unstoppable wave of Novus Ordo-inspired neo-latinizations.
Again it depends, in this case on the person perhaps more so than the Churches themselves. For some, yes, itās pretty close to the same concept. For others, itās far closer to the Novus Ordo mindset of false ārestoration.ā
Well ā¦ that one is a āyes, butā ā¦
From what I hear, this is not true. I suppose itās great for an anglophone to hear the DL but pity the poor Easterner who wonāt hear it in his language any more.