A Quo Vadis Moment in the Church

I chose the name Quo Vadis for my Substack profile because it is the name of one of my favorite books.  If you haven’t read Henryk Sienkiewicz’s book, you simply must.  It is not only a literary classic; it is also a Christian classic.  Many Catholics know the derivation and meaning of this phrase, Quo Vadis, but for those who don’t, it’s important to explain it, because it is needed context for this article.

Legend has it that during Nero’s persecution of Christians, Peter was fleeing Rome and he comes to a crossroads where he meets our risen Lord.    “Quo vadis?” Wither thou goest? Peter asks, to which Jesus replies: “Romam vado iterum crucifigi.” I am going to Rome to be crucified again.  As a result, Peter turns around and heads back towards Rome and Vatican Hill.  

In a recent interview published in The National Catholic Fishwrap (Reporter) Archbishop Roche, the head of the Congregation for Divine Worship, made the following statement:

“The differences between the pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II Masses, he said, are not simply the use of Latin, chant, silence and the direction the priest faces.

The promotion of the pre-Vatican II liturgy as somehow more holy or prayerful than the current liturgy "is not basically a liturgical problem, it is an ecclesial problem...”

This is an important and revealing comment, because it is the REAL REASON for the restrictions on the Latin Mass. More importantly, it suggests a crossroads, a decision point for Catholics.

The word Ecclesia is from the Greek. It is used extensively throughout the New Testament and is translated as Church. Thus, an ecclesial problem is a problem of or pertaining to the Church.  When the Archbishop states that this is an ecclesial problem, he is saying there is a problem within the Church over the idea or definition of what it means to be Catholic, and how that belief is expressed or manifested in faith and practice.

Last week, in my first post here on Substack, I wrote about these differences when I stated the following:

“The Latin Mass represents and engenders a more masculine, more muscular type of Catholicism which isn’t afraid to directly confront the moral evils of the world. It sees sin in black and white, it isn’t afraid to judge actions, it accepts its mission of evangelizing the world and converting one’s neighbor. It doesn’t make accommodations to the world. It is more concerned about a person’s immortality than their mortality -- thus the differences in vision with regard to worship during the COVID pandemic.

The Vatican and the Pope see this Catholic praxis as a threat to the post Vatican II spirituality promulgated and embodied in the new Mass.  This new spirituality seeks to accompany people, it makes accommodations with the world, and has fully embraced aggiornamento – which the spirituality of the Latin Mass largely rejects. It meets people where they are but never calls them to conversion; it refuses to judge actions for fear of being labeled judgmental, it is more concerned about climate change than abortion.  It embraces a “pastoral approach” and thus refuses to use Canon 915 to excommunicate recalcitrant politicians who publicly deny Church teaching because it views excommunication as a punishment, rather than as a medicinal remedy.

This is the real battle being waged: the battle of what it means to be Catholic.  It is a battle for the soul of the believer and of the Church. “

These differences described above are precisely what Archbishop Roche means when he says that the Latin Mass issue is not a liturgical problem but an ecclesial one.  The current Vatican regime’s concept of what it means to be Catholic is not the same as that found and practiced in Latin Mass communities (nor, for that matter, by traditional Catholics who are parishioners at Novus Ordo parishes).

Given this admission from the Vatican, it seems we have come to a crossroads, just as Peter did.  We are being forced to choose between two concepts of what it means to be Catholic. This is our modern day “Quo Vadis” moment.   Will we choose to follow, live, and practice our Catholic faith in accordance with the praxis of the last fifty years and the way Rome is insisting we must going forward, or will we choose to live and practice our faith in a way that is consistent with the previous nineteen centuries of belief, in the unbroken continuity of our apostolic faith?

 As for me and my house we choose the true Church founded by Christ, not the one birthed by the false spirit of Vatican II and currently promoted by the Vatican.