Posted on 03/03/2014 5:06:09 AM PST by piusv
I don't care for the irreverence that seems to follow the N.O. in so many places. I don't care for the heretical music, the focus on the priest as being the primary actor and focus (rather than Christ), the abuses that seem to track with it hand in hand.
And I wouldn't hardly have a problem with pointing that out to students or publishing that in an official capacity (if I were on the faculty of a school).
But there is a world of difference between pointing out that the N.O. lends itself to abuses and stating that it is not valid or somehow valid but not licit...because that directly challenges the primacy of the Holy Father...and that is unacceptable and lends itself to some really, really, really bad theological conclusions.
The freshman parents' orientation at Georgetown U so offended a relative of mine, they almost pulled their kid out. The female presenter said that drinking was absolutely not allowed in the dorms, but when it comes to sex, she scolded the parents , "This isn't Mayberry anymore!" and proceeded to explain the co-ed dorms and the practice of "sexiling" -- a student asking his or her roommate to leave their room so he or she could use the room to have sex. These are 18-year-old kids away from home for 5 minutes. They also have "Sex Positive" week and a gay-straight alliance.
Wonder how GU's alumni contributions are going -- oh, wait: they've been accepting money from the Saudis for their "Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding", so no problem.
We are certain that this can only be accomplished by remaining faithful to the timeless, sacred traditions that have been passed down to us through the ages and have always been true source of faith, piety, and culture....”
I think the above could be considered, like I said above, "fighting words". It does seem to imply at least that this is not possible without the TLM.
I think the above could be considered, like I said above, "fighting words". It does seem to imply at least that this is not possible without the TLM.
Seems to me like they should be advocating to celebrate the Mass according to the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom, since that is far more the timeless, sacred tradition (being about 1,000 years older than the Liturgy of St Pius V).
Note: I say that as somebody who loves both the TLM and the Eastern Rite and think that both are far superior to the N.O. But to say that the E.F. Mass is truly ancient (in terms of the timeline of the Church) is laughable.
Wouldn't that make them guilty of disputing the primacy of a canonized pope?
“Wouldn’t that make them guilty of disputing the primacy of a canonized pope?”
Then we get into fights about popes issuing apostolic constitutions: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_19690403_missale-romanum_en.html
Unless, of course, you choose to get into some really complicated theological nastiness. For example, the liceity of the Eastern Rites and the Ambrosian Rite (as well as others like the Dominican Rite, etc.)
The point I’m getting at is when they say that the Liturgy of St Pius V is the ONLY way to achieve that, it falls flat when they simultaneously appeal to it based upon its antiquity.
Again, repeating, re-iterating: I full well understand the problems that the N.O. seems to have constantly accompanying it. So I’m not defending the N.O. as being optimal.
That letter from the bishop reads like a cold slap in the face.
What’s the matter with him?!
The Modernists are feeling emboldened by Francis.
It surprised me too. I was thinking that all the new Bishops were in line with Pope Benedict. Makes me wonder.
In point of fact, no permission is needed under the prevailing legislation. The clergy have the right to use the older liturgies as they please. However, given the political realities of most dioceses, a pastor would be asking to have his head handed to him if he did not at least consult his bishop. Look up Summorum Pontificum for details.
“It cannot however be the primary tool of evangelization. You have to reach people in a language they can understand.”
How did the Catholic Christians through the Dark Ages and the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and up through today manage to figure out their religion and relate to it when it was always the Latin Mass that they heard. My, how did they ever manage to understand or love their religion? How ever did the religion spread throughout the world when the Mass was not given in the local language. Must have been magic.
Where the bishop ends the letter with the valediction “Sincerely Yours in Christ”, he’s lying or mistaken.
Yeah, it’s puke-worthy, isn’t it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.