Yes indeed, the arms extended in the form of the cross at the Unde et memores is exceptionally beautiful with deep meaning as are the prayers before the Sacrament prior to communion
Thank you Fr. Jonathan for the explanation! I don't know how to celebrate Sarum rite yet, but I'm very impressed by its profound simplicity and solemnity. I'm sure it'll let us deeper into the mystery of Christ's Body and Blood brought to us on the Altar. Let's praise him in every holy Mass we celebrate and let us grow deeper into this mystery where Jesus comes down for us from heaven and heaven and earth are combined and do meet.
This is a great channel! I've been binging on these episodes lately. I'm an American Roman Catholic, but lately my spiritual life has seemed a bit stale; almost like I'm remote from who Jesus even is. So I've basically been trying to "summon" his presence by learning about traditions ever so slightly different than mine. In addition to modern Anglicans (eg, Rowan Williams, et al) I've also been reading the colonial American Puritans (eg, Jonathan Edwards), and have been considering visiting an Anglican mass in my home state (there's evidently an Anglican Church nearby that's somehow in full communion with Rome--St Cuthbert). Any suggestions anyone has for breaking my "slump" would be welcomed:-)
Glad to hear you're finding something here of value. I think you're doing the right thing in looking around. A "slump" in spirit is usually indicative of the need to return to the Living Water that flows within us from our baptism. As long as you are praying daily, reading the Holy Scriptures and the Fathers and trying to see Our Lord in all whom you meet and love them accordingly, then that will always be to your credit. Don't expect slumps to go overnight but just persevere. When slumps do pass, the incoming light is truly wonderful to experience.
@@Warwickensis thank you, Father! I suppose part of the problem is, after looking at some modern NT research, it's become abundantly clear to me that the world of Jesus and the Apostles is utterly alien to me, and that my modern mind has likely imported so much extraneous context that it's doubtful I even have the basic Christian message correct. Even deciphering someone as "recent" as Jonathan Edwards has proven problematic. For example, I expected "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" to be a straightforward textbook example of a good ol' fashioned pulpit-pounding Hellfire & Brimstone sermon. But when you consider the exceptional literary quality, the calm manner in which it was delivered, along with the fact that Edwards was in the middle of a transitional period of the religious fervor and Salem witches of his grandparents and the clockwork Newtonian universe he was eagerly exploring (spookily enough, he died testing a vaccine on himself), it casts a completely different light on the piece. And if I could be so wrong about a text in my language, from my country, a mere couple centuries ago, is there any limit to how wrong I could be about a Jewish text in Koine Greek from the Middle East a couple millenia ago?
@@WayneDrake-uk1gg well, this is a big question and one that requires much prayer, especially to the Holy Ghost for enlightenment and stability in understanding. Personally, I find myself rejecting much of the modern literary criticism of the Bible on the grounds that it has its basis in Enlightenment thinking and wilful scepticism of Christian belief. The fact of the matter is that the Gospels and the Acts are being proven reliable objectively from manuscripts written from the earliest days of the Church. As a result, it is not the clinical and wilfully godless approach to History that has the authority on the truth of the Gospel, but rather the Church which has sought to preserve not only the teaching of Our Lord, not only the truth of His life and resurrection, but the truth of His way of thinking. This goes beyond language and it is in trying to live the ancient faith albeit in a modern setting that is the calling of the Christian. There is no such thing as the "Modern Church" properly speaking, there is only the Church and those who seek to make it fit their time. I suspect you've already read the letters of St Ignatius of Antioch but it is worth seeing how his letters show what the Church should be like. It's also worth reading the Life of Moses by St Gregory of Nyssa.
@@Warwickensis absolutely, modern higher criticism tends to be willfully "mischievous", to say the least, and usually quite transparently so. But even the In-House scholars of, eg, "the New Perspective on Paul", have somewhat thrown a monkey wrench into conventional Western exegesis. Also, as a side note, I wouldn't quite say that I've been "ruined by vain philosophy", but I'm definitely a somewhat disillusioned former mathematics student who developed a strong distrust of human ability to formally pursue truth. I think it was Bertrand Russell who said something like "The more formally and precisely we state something, the less we have any earthly idea what we're talking about". And so I've definitely developed a reserved appreciation of men like Camus and Derrida. Of course, mathematical thinking in general is still so deeply ingrained in my soul that when I find a priest with a "Topology for Quantum Mechanics" book in the background, I find myself irresistibly drawn to watch all his videos 😂 😂 😂. Thank you once more for your thoughts and guidance!
Ah, the quarrel over using Latin!!!!!!! As an RC while I see the advantage and in most cases a judicious of use of the vernacular, I also live in a part of the country which is a potent of different cultures and languages. What I have seen happen is that the exclusive use of the vernacular forbids different cultures under the one parish roof from ever really praying together with one voice. In many American"multicultural" parishes we have been completely balkanized into tightly knit linguistic groups. This affects the whole culture of the church. I am not against diversity but I do believe that there are a basic series of Mass prayers, the Gloria, the Creed, the Sanctus, The Pater, the Agnus the short greetings that should be known by all congregations in Latin so we can effectively pray together particularly for the great feasts of the Church. The use of a common liturgical language belonging to no one reminds us that our unity supersedes our linguistic, cultural or national identities. I will often correct RCs who state,"I am an American Catholic" by telling them no, you are first a Catholic who happens to live in America. For such a diverse Church as Roman Catholicism, the willful abandonment of her common liturgical language has severed her from her cultural past, frustrating the passing on of tradition and has balkanized and fragmented her into competing linguistic kingdoms where we can no longer offer common worship to God una voce.
It has pained me to see people who benefit spiritually from the "E"F being pressured, gaslit and browbeaten to gain the same benefit from, I have to say, sub-standard modern translations of the Mass. We had the same in the CofE where the majestic language of the Book of Common Prayer was replaced with the same translation into sixties English. Hieratic languages have their place and I would rather encourage education into those languages than to insult the educability of the congregation with a contemporary translation fit for only one place at one time. If you haven't already done so, may I invite you to look at the text of the English Missal and compare it both with the Novus Ordo and the Vetus Ordo.
I have long been interested in this use, but as a continuer, I have always thought that the Affirmation of Saint Louis is fairly strict as to allowable uses.
The Affirmation of St Louis of course was drawn up at a time of trial for Americans and Canadians. We Brits didn't have that until the 1990s. This means that the Spirit of St Louis is continued in the UK along the same sort of lines. I don't think the G3 bishops would find too many problems with it. If they allow the Prayer Book and the Missals - well, Sarum informs both.
@Warwickensis I tend to agree, but not having been alive in 1928, the intricacies of why the new edition was created are unknown to me. I remember as a kid asking if we could have a 1549 service, as I had just bought a copy of that book and was told it was OK for evening prayer but Sunday Eucharist had to be 1928. Funny thing was I know we used a missal for those, although the congregation read from 1928.
Yes indeed, the arms extended in the form of the cross at the Unde et memores is exceptionally beautiful with deep meaning as are the prayers before the Sacrament prior to communion
Consubstantiation is how I would describe my view. I've often described it as sacramental union.
Thank you Fr. Jonathan for the explanation! I don't know how to celebrate Sarum rite yet, but
I'm very impressed by its profound simplicity and solemnity. I'm sure it'll let us deeper into the mystery of Christ's Body and Blood brought to us on the Altar. Let's praise him in every holy Mass we celebrate and let us grow
deeper into this mystery where Jesus comes down for us from heaven and heaven and earth
are combined and do meet.
Yes Pax Brede, we have an embossed image of the irgin and child at St Osmund's :)
This is a great channel! I've been binging on these episodes lately. I'm an American Roman Catholic, but lately my spiritual life has seemed a bit stale; almost like I'm remote from who Jesus even is. So I've basically been trying to "summon" his presence by learning about traditions ever so slightly different than mine. In addition to modern Anglicans (eg, Rowan Williams, et al) I've also been reading the colonial American Puritans (eg, Jonathan Edwards), and have been considering visiting an Anglican mass in my home state (there's evidently an Anglican Church nearby that's somehow in full communion with Rome--St Cuthbert). Any suggestions anyone has for breaking my "slump" would be welcomed:-)
Glad to hear you're finding something here of value. I think you're doing the right thing in looking around. A "slump" in spirit is usually indicative of the need to return to the Living Water that flows within us from our baptism. As long as you are praying daily, reading the Holy Scriptures and the Fathers and trying to see Our Lord in all whom you meet and love them accordingly, then that will always be to your credit.
Don't expect slumps to go overnight but just persevere. When slumps do pass, the incoming light is truly wonderful to experience.
@@Warwickensis thank you, Father! I suppose part of the problem is, after looking at some modern NT research, it's become abundantly clear to me that the world of Jesus and the Apostles is utterly alien to me, and that my modern mind has likely imported so much extraneous context that it's doubtful I even have the basic Christian message correct. Even deciphering someone as "recent" as Jonathan Edwards has proven problematic. For example, I expected "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" to be a straightforward textbook example of a good ol' fashioned pulpit-pounding Hellfire & Brimstone sermon. But when you consider the exceptional literary quality, the calm manner in which it was delivered, along with the fact that Edwards was in the middle of a transitional period of the religious fervor and Salem witches of his grandparents and the clockwork Newtonian universe he was eagerly exploring (spookily enough, he died testing a vaccine on himself), it casts a completely different light on the piece. And if I could be so wrong about a text in my language, from my country, a mere couple centuries ago, is there any limit to how wrong I could be about a Jewish text in Koine Greek from the Middle East a couple millenia ago?
@@WayneDrake-uk1gg well, this is a big question and one that requires much prayer, especially to the Holy Ghost for enlightenment and stability in understanding.
Personally, I find myself rejecting much of the modern literary criticism of the Bible on the grounds that it has its basis in Enlightenment thinking and wilful scepticism of Christian belief.
The fact of the matter is that the Gospels and the Acts are being proven reliable objectively from manuscripts written from the earliest days of the Church. As a result, it is not the clinical and wilfully godless approach to History that has the authority on the truth of the Gospel, but rather the Church which has sought to preserve not only the teaching of Our Lord, not only the truth of His life and resurrection, but the truth of His way of thinking. This goes beyond language and it is in trying to live the ancient faith albeit in a modern setting that is the calling of the Christian. There is no such thing as the "Modern Church" properly speaking, there is only the Church and those who seek to make it fit their time.
I suspect you've already read the letters of St Ignatius of Antioch but it is worth seeing how his letters show what the Church should be like. It's also worth reading the Life of Moses by St Gregory of Nyssa.
@@Warwickensis absolutely, modern higher criticism tends to be willfully "mischievous", to say the least, and usually quite transparently so. But even the In-House scholars of, eg, "the New Perspective on Paul", have somewhat thrown a monkey wrench into conventional Western exegesis. Also, as a side note, I wouldn't quite say that I've been "ruined by vain philosophy", but I'm definitely a somewhat disillusioned former mathematics student who developed a strong distrust of human ability to formally pursue truth. I think it was Bertrand Russell who said something like "The more formally and precisely we state something, the less we have any earthly idea what we're talking about". And so I've definitely developed a reserved appreciation of men like Camus and Derrida. Of course, mathematical thinking in general is still so deeply ingrained in my soul that when I find a priest with a "Topology for Quantum Mechanics" book in the background, I find myself irresistibly drawn to watch all his videos 😂 😂 😂. Thank you once more for your thoughts and guidance!
Ah, the quarrel over using Latin!!!!!!! As an RC while I see the advantage and in most cases a judicious of use of the vernacular, I also live in a part of the country which is a potent of different cultures and languages. What I have seen happen is that the exclusive use of the vernacular forbids different cultures under the one parish roof from ever really praying together with one voice. In many American"multicultural" parishes we have been completely balkanized into tightly knit linguistic groups. This affects the whole culture of the church. I am not against diversity but I do believe that there are a basic series of Mass prayers, the Gloria, the Creed, the Sanctus, The Pater, the Agnus the short greetings that should be known by all congregations in Latin so we can effectively pray together particularly for the great feasts of the Church. The use of a common liturgical language belonging to no one reminds us that our unity supersedes our linguistic, cultural or national identities. I will often correct RCs who state,"I am an American Catholic" by telling them no, you are first a Catholic who happens to live in America. For such a diverse Church as Roman Catholicism, the willful abandonment of her common liturgical language has severed her from her cultural past, frustrating the passing on of tradition and has balkanized and fragmented her into competing linguistic kingdoms where we can no longer offer common worship to God una voce.
It has pained me to see people who benefit spiritually from the "E"F being pressured, gaslit and browbeaten to gain the same benefit from, I have to say, sub-standard modern translations of the Mass. We had the same in the CofE where the majestic language of the Book of Common Prayer was replaced with the same translation into sixties English.
Hieratic languages have their place and I would rather encourage education into those languages than to insult the educability of the congregation with a contemporary translation fit for only one place at one time.
If you haven't already done so, may I invite you to look at the text of the English Missal and compare it both with the Novus Ordo and the Vetus Ordo.
I have long been interested in this use, but as a continuer, I have always thought that the Affirmation of Saint Louis is fairly strict as to allowable uses.
The Affirmation of St Louis of course was drawn up at a time of trial for Americans and Canadians. We Brits didn't have that until the 1990s. This means that the Spirit of St Louis is continued in the UK along the same sort of lines. I don't think the G3 bishops would find too many problems with it. If they allow the Prayer Book and the Missals - well, Sarum informs both.
And now I think I know who you are, though I may be wrong, Father Archdeacon. How is Virginia treating you?
@@Warwickensis Nope, you got that one wrong. I am AFS1970 on the (somewhat dormant) forums.
@Warwickensis I tend to agree, but not having been alive in 1928, the intricacies of why the new edition was created are unknown to me. I remember as a kid asking if we could have a 1549 service, as I had just bought a copy of that book and was told it was OK for evening prayer but Sunday Eucharist had to be 1928. Funny thing was I know we used a missal for those, although the congregation read from 1928.
Ah! 😆 Now I have you! Serves me right for drawing conclusions based on coincidences across social media. I'm so glad you're here!