As Mr. Sherlock’s own stories reveals, those who cared knew what was going on when Mass was in Latin. I can attest that with the Mass in English, those who don’t care still don’t have a clue. In any case, the Council didn’t mandate Mass in the vernacular; that was a post-conciliar innovation. The Council allowed for some parts (scripture readings, mainly, if memory serves) to be read in translation.

1. Charles, absolutely correct.

The entire piece misunderstands Vatican II and its consequences for the Roman Catholic Church as it relies on anecdotes (seriously, Roman Catholics not having a clue Mass is about God?) and the rose-colored glasses of ARCIC efforts that in today’s world can go nowhere.

In particular I am struck by the talk of ‘hospitality’ and the reference to alleged infrequent reception of communion back in the days of the Traditional Latin Mass vs. frequent reception today.  Mr. Sherlock completely ignores the parallel and catastrophic decrease in the laity going to the sacrament of Confession.

The last paragraph alone tells you that this chap is either in la la land or else being very discourteous to score points. In essence one Rome becomes liberal and protestant all will be well….

...all signs point in the opposite direction. Even if Rome wanted to it could not do so. Unlike synods it lacks even the rubrics to make things up as it goes along so as to give us mrs Pope

To be clear, I thought his points were interesting, if shaped by a profound misunderstanding of Catholicism. I do think his understanding of Catholic liturgy is wrong, but the point about the lectionary us a good one. 

Indeed, there won’t be a Mrs. Pope, nor will Catholic-Anglican differences fade away, no more than Catholic-Orthodox differences. These differences are profound and substantial. Nonetheless, we are called to charity and goodwill toward our brethren, even - maybe especially - our separated brethren.