'Real' Difference between Catholicism and Protestantism
Today (May 29) is the optional memorial for Pope St. Paul VI. Although he wasn’t charismatic like John Paul II, brilliant like Benedict XVI, or vociferous and a bit contentious like Francis, his papacy may be the most consequential in centuries—for two reasons: the Novus Ordo and Humanae Vitae.
These were explosions in worship and morality that led to polemical postures between so-called traditionalists and modernists. To this day, the papacy of Paul VI (1963-1978) is both loved and hated, depending on whether you primarily value human life or liturgical worship.
Looking at these two issues beneath the surface, we must distinguish between what is unchangeable Church doctrine and what is changeable by its nature. That which is changeable would be a matter of prudence and proper authority.
Novus Ordo
Novus Ordo is Latin denoting the new order of the Mass. Changing the form of liturgy is a prudential decision to which the pope is given authority. The “liturgy wars” have become a clash between what is seen as reverent worship focused on beauty and mystery vs. accessible worship focused on understanding and participation. One major aim of Vatican II was to inspire/prompt/educate the laity to participate more fully in their relationship with God—to own their faith rather than simply depend on clergy and religious to provide the rituals. The new order of the Mass celebrated in the vernacular was meant to foster this movement, to foster holiness in the laity and better equip them to evangelize the world. That is the job of every Christian.
The question is, has the modernization of the Mass gone too far? Has it gutted too much mystery and beauty to the point of de-Christianizing worship, to instead reflect more the form of secular entertainment? That is the claim of some. Others are grateful that they can understand liturgical prayers and more are apt to give their “Yes” to God, for the more you understand the more you can love.
Personally, I don’t understand why we can’t blend both truth and beauty—understanding and mystery—into one. Perhaps that’s where liturgy is gradually headed, and that wouldn’t be a bad thing.
Humanae Vitae
Humane Vitae was a papal encyclical that confirmed the Church’s 2000-year-old teaching condemning artificial birth control (i.e., conception-prevention). Purposely impeding the marital act from attaining its natural end in order to enjoy sterile sex is abuse, and objectively a mortal sin. This has not changed in two-millennia of Catholic Church teaching—even though Protestant denominations fell like dominoes due to the pressures of the ‘sexual revolution’ of the 20th century, of which we are still in the throes.
Unlike liturgy, this not a matter of prudential decision. Nor is it a matter of conscience. Rather, this is a matter of natural law that cannot be changed. Etched in the order of creation and human nature, contraception is intrinsically evil, meaning it is a moral absolute that can never be good or justified, no matter the circumstance. Those who hope a pope will change Church teaching on contraception, as has been done with the order of the Mass, are wasting their time and energy. This is literally impossible. The Holy Spirit will never permit a pope to teach heresy on essential matters of faith and morals, and the sin of contraception, which is the foundation of the sexual revolution and our culture of death, is an essential matter of morality.
Therefore, change in liturgy is a matter of prudence to be decided by the successor of Peter for the good of the universal Church. Catholics may disagree with the decisions, but must follow what is decided. With the question of contraception, however, it’s a matter of obedience. Attacking human life by impeding the creation of a human being made in God's image who will live forever is always a grave evil that can never be willed or practiced. The first (form of liturgy) is changeable by proper Church authority, the second (sex, marriage) is unchangeable by the authority of the Creator God.