WORSE THAN DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN

The Remnant ^ | 01/2004 | Thomas A. Droleskey, Ph.D.

[Land of the Irish]

Ping

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Father Miceli took a few bites out of his meal at a diner in Massapequa Park, Long Island, New York, looked at me and said, “The Pope’s a liberal. Bernardin is a friend of his from the Second Vatican Council. They are fellow progressives. Don’t kid yourself.”

Ouch. I guess there's only one thing left to do. Attack the reputation of Father Miceli. </ waiting.....>

[Maximilian]

Bump for Dr. Thomas Drolesky.

He really lays it on the line in this article. It sounds like he is getting more radicalized by the day.

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

Yes, there are tremendous problems with the NO Mass. But to the Vatican's credit, I do think some of the GIRM changes have been fantastic and some bishops have also done a praiseworthy job in bringing about change. My Catholic Center being a prime example. We are kneeling now (yes!!!), we have correct substance (yes!!!!), we have a proper order of reception (not perfect, but yes!!!), petitions are read from the ambo, not the congregation (yes!!!), bowing at the incarnation in the creed (yes!!!), reverence for the Eucharist (yes!!!!), none of which existed before. Now are there problems, you bet, music is a little too folksy for me, but I don't think I can reasonably expect Gregorian Chant any time soon.

Plus it looks like the wording of the NO Mass will be changed (the English Translation) which will be a giant leap forward, fixing the awful translation from the Latin that we have right now: CREDO does not translate We Believe!

Yeah, it is baby steps, certainly not as quickly as anyone would like (who trends Conservative/Orthodox/Traditional), but some of the excesses of the progressives/liberals (read dissenters or worse) are being corrected. I hope for a Universal Indult for the Tridetine Right, if not that, hopefully more Latin in the NO liturgy, we shall see ultimately.

God Bless

[kellynla]

Here is a link: Directory of Traditional Latin Masses in the United States and Canada: http://www.traditio.com/tradlib/masslat.txt

[Askel5]

This about does it for me.

[RobbyS]

The advantage lies in the fact that younger priests have nothing personal invested in adding "touches" to the order of mass. The older, now retiring priests --many of them--have taken great pleasure in "playing" with it and pushing things to the limit. If Rome tells them to make reasonable changes, they will happily conform. After every revolution, there is a reaction.

[ultima ratio]

No--Drolesky is merely recognizing at last the radical nature of the man at the top. For myself, I came to these conclusions long ago. It is JPII who is the problem in the Church, not lesser churchmen. He is even at the root of the present corruption, having himself appointed Bernadin who later controlled the US Bishops' Conference and who loosed the tide of the gay agenda on the American Church--about which this pope does absolutely nothing. The picture is identical elsewhere--in France, Germany, Britain, Ireland, Australia, Italy, you name it.

Recently I made a bet with myself. When certain Jewish circles began to attack the Gibson film and then dared to attack the Gospels directly, calling them anti-semitic, I wondered how JPII would react. I knew as a liberal he would be hard pressed to comment favorably on the film.

Recently JPII confirmed what I suspected--he made a predictable choice. By insisting on his own silence, and by saying nothing to reprove those who oppose the film and the Gospels themselves, he has given the cold shoulder to a work of art with the potential to convert millions. I am not surprised. It was the liberal thing to do.

[american colleen]

Just to keep things in context:

Whither the Mass? (1): In 1965, when still Bishop of Cracow, John Paul II showed he was bewildered about which direction the liturgical reform would take, particularly in Africa. "Where will it end?" he asked, "Certainly we will preserve the basic elements, the bread, the wine, but all else will be changed according to local tradition: words, gestures, colours, vestments, chants, architecture, decor. The problem of liturgical reform is enormous ... " (Malinskl, Mon Ami, Karl Wojtyla, Paris, 1980, p.220.)

Found that on an Una Voca website. Reads a little bit differently than the bs spin "The Remnant" and Dr. D put on it. Pitiful.

[Unam Sanctam]

It is JPII who is the problem in the Church, not lesser churchmen.

Yet more anti-Papal vilification and calumny.

[Unam Sanctam]

Really you and Jack Chick ought to get together and cooperate. After all, the Pope is the Antichrist and Rome is the scarlet woman. Better get the word out!

[american colleen]

Drolesky is merely recognizing at last the radical nature of the man at the top.

I see you've come back more bitter and angry than when you left. I swear to God I cannot tell the difference between you and the liberal director of religious education nun in my parish.

[Romulus]

Meaning what, Askel?

Writing off JPII as a liturgical disaster seems tempting, and in many respects reasonable. Still, he did cough up Ecclesia Dei and Liturgiam Authenticam. A half-assed and hypocritical approach to fixing abuses ain't much, but it's the measure of the mess we're in to point out that other bishops would've done even less, made things even worse.

Cold comfort, I know. But think of the Church that survived the murderous 10th century when popes and cardinals routinely bartered and murdered their way to ecclesiastical office. Think of the Renaissance papacies that were comprehensively corrupt.

You enjoy the rare and precious blessing of not having to endure the shameful indignity to which the Mass has been reduced. I honestly doubt whether there's anywhere in Christendom where the ancient Mass is offered with more dignity, with more splendor and punctilio and due reverence than St. Patrick's. That so many others are left wandering in a hateful and unholy wasteland is a tragedy, but at least rejoice that it's not the cross you bear.

Remember: "Your pain at [the Church's] ineffectiveness is a sign of your nearness to God."

JPII has been a disappointment in many respects, but brilliant success in others. I suspect his enduring and richest legacy will be theological. His contribution in bringing Humanae Vitae into being, and his reasoned analysis and defense of human sexuality and an "adequate anthropology" may be humanity's last chance to save its own sense of Self from the liberated New Man you've done so much to warn us about.

Cheer up.

[ultima ratio]

If you cannot tell the difference, then you have a problem. The Pontiff is a nice grandfatherly man and a popular celebrity. But that does not make him a good pope. He has done nothing to stem the tides of corruption and apostasy in his Church. That is failure on an enormous scale for which he is primarily responsible by reason of his faulty appointments and liberal policies in general. He has had twenty-five years to correct course. Instead he compounds his mistakes. Attack me personally, if you wish--but this does not make the actual record any prettier. By their fruits you will know them...

[Fifthmark]

Really you and Jack Chick ought to get together and cooperate.

You can lump Our Lady of La Salette in there too, as she has said that Rome will become the seat of the Antichrist. Or as Melanie Calvat would have us believe, at least.

[ultima ratio]

No--you need to wake up and realize there's a problem--and he sits on the throne of Peter. Who appointed Bernadin and Mahoney and Kasper and Weakland and Law and O'Brien and Clark and Ryan and on and on and on? On whose watch is the Church imploding, wracked by systemic corruption and radical agendas?

[ultima ratio]

If there's "vilification" and "calumny" it is on your part. I merely point out the facts. The Church is drowning in corruption, confusion, and outright apostasy--and these are at unprecedented levels in recent history. JPII is directly responsible.

[Unam Sanctam]

He appointed some bad bishops, but also some very good ones, e.g., Ratzinger, Bruskewitz, Dolan, Burke, O'Malley. He has made some errors of judgment and perhaps his strategy of allowing the tares to grow up with the wheat is too lenient, but that does not make him unorthodox, as you so falsely claim. You refuse to admit the positive things that he has done, and falsely claim that he is unorthodox. Your criticism is not constructive, it is destructive.