Strange but true. . .

If you have the stomach for it, you can watch this snippet of a Roman Catholic Mass from the middle of June.  It is a great deal to digest.  The liturgical looseness is to be expected but the co-opting of a whole liturgy to accommodate an LGBTQIA+ agenda is rather shocking.  One can only hope that the chasuble in the chancel will never be worn.  I was surprised to hear that Rome is the most welcoming to LGBTQIA+ folks and their agenda and perhaps the authors if their Catechism might also be a little surprised.  Or maybe there is no shock or outrage left anymore.  No one should be surprised that their mission is directed to sex workers and trans folks in Kenya.  That said, the strangeness is not simply the liturgical quirks or the obvious LGBTQIA+ friendly atmosphere.  What makes this odd is that this is allowed while those who wish for Latin or ad orientum or reverence or kneeling are castigated, warned, and eventually shut down.  I wish I could say it were only true of Rome.  Sadly, it is not.

The day has come when those who cling to the traditions of the faithful are more and more seen as problem people in every denomination.  It is also true among Lutherans.  Pastors are warned against introducing change too quickly or without regard for the consciences of the people and particularly warned against such things as chanting, incense, and reverence.  At the same time, when pastors come in and put a drum set front and center and replace the organ with guitars, keyboards, and a beat the dominates the music, these pastors are lauded as missional and the people urged to care about those not in the pews enough to give up their sacred cows of liturgy, vestments, and ceremonies.  The vast majority of larger congregations offer at least one contemporary worship option and many of them have assigned the Divine Service to an unpopular time slot and this is still happening in Missouri.  

Why is it that those who take seriously the Confessional call to catholic doctrine and practice are so often singled out for criticism and those who live on the fringes of the church's liturgical life are considered pace setters and mission-minded?  The vast majority of LCMS congregations use the hymnal and at least the minimal ceremonial of that book but the vast majority of people in LCMS congregations worship in congregations that at least offers some form of blended or contemporary service.  Most of us who have a fuller liturgical celebration are less intent upon seeing what we do imposed on those who do less than we are the whole Synod adopting the Divine Service as minimum, the hymns of the hymnal as their song, and reverence as the character of what happens in worship.  We are not about sending a thurible to every address of every congregation in Synod but we are about a clear and unmistakable face to what happens on Sunday morning among us.  It may not be uniformity but it is at least unity.  Rome has the same problem.

Rome has its dioceses of Charlotte or Detroit or other places where bishops are silent as church mice about the extremes of liturgical practice and faith expressed but roar like lions against someone who wants to kneel to receive the Sacrament.  While I do not know of many Latin Mass folks who insist that it has to be Vetus Ordo, I do know that they expect the Novus Ordo to at least acknowledge in some way the kinship between the rites.  They long for unity even if they admit that uniformity may not be possible.  One it tolerated and, perhaps, even celebrated, while the other is constrained and forbidden.  One pope contradicts another on this subject and throws a tantrum over folks who want to be nearer what was the 500 year norm.  Sad but true, strange but true.  Leo has not yet signaled what he will do and Lutherans have no pope to insist upon anything so I suspect the status quo will remain for both Rome and Wittenberg.  It is easier to gang up on the catholics than to curb the excesses of the Protestants in nearly every denomination.