Posted on 06/06/2016 8:31:02 AM PDT by ebb tide
Radicati Editorial: "Thank God We Did Not Obey Those Forcing the New Mass Upon Us"
The New Mass, Source of Pious Naturalism
Editorial: Radicati nella fede, June 2016
Newsletter of the Catholic community of
Vocogno, Diocese of Novara, Italy
Thank God we did not obey.
We are going to shock you, but some provocations are beneficial and useful.
Thank God we did not obey those, who, in order to keep us within “ordinary pastoral care” (while allowing us reluctantly an occasional Traditional Mass) asked us not to be closed to the Council’s New Mass. Thank God we did not obey: we did not cave in to the “political” concern of altering the custody of the faith which is what everyone is doing now out of “a greater obedience.”
We have just celebrated the Feast of Corpus Christi: what meaning would there be in solemnly adoring the Eucharistic Presence of the Lord and not, at the same time, defend the pure Rite of Mass?
We say this for many devout priests and lay faithful, sincerely concerned about the respect due to the Body of the Lord, but not so concerned about the poisoning inside the body of the Church produced by the New Mass.
It’s as if the New Mass has put the Christian populace to sleep within a kind of pious Naturalism. In the Church, Naturalism is the constant forgetting of the supernatural life. Naturalism is the concern for the prevalently human aspects of Christianity, interpreted and judged according to the categories of our times, according to the cultural modes of the moment. Those in the Church who tend towards Naturalism don’t deny Jesus Christ, but neither do they consider His direct power over the entire reality [of things]: it’s as if nothing depends on Him.
How can this be deduced? By the fact that when considering the state of the world, they don’t turn to God for a solution to its evils. They don’t turn to God, but follow the vain talk of the world filled with empty rhetoric.
Let’s give an example: at Fatima Our Lady asked the three little shepherds to pray and offer sacrifices for the end of the war, in this way indicating that the state of the world and nations depends on our obedience to God. Can you imagine a Papal or Episcopal document today being so explicit?: indicating that the return to God, to Jesus Christ, is the solution to all the grave economic, political, moral and spiritual problems in the world? Even priests who privately think that the root of all evils in the world is indeed the sin of men, would be careful about saying this in public, seeing the tremendously naturalistic climate reigning in the Church today: yet the Fatima message is a perfectly faithful echo of all Sacred Scripture.
There are many causes for this disastrous situation but the main one is the reform of the Rite of Holy Mass.
The New Mass - intentionally modern in respect to Tradition – in order to be modern - bent to Naturalism, inaugurating pious Naturalism. To favour this, the image of the Last Supper was given to the Catholic Mass: Jesus in the centre, represented by the priest, and then the assembly, the community of disciples, who listen to Him and are fed by Him. In the Novus Ordo even the most solemnly celebrated Mass gives this image. In the best of cases, it’s the Mass that stops at “Jesus present in the midst of us” . This is why since the Council, the Church has no longer put God at the centre, but man. To man everything is being sacrificed, even the truth of Revelation. To man and his rights everything is being sacrificed, including God.
The New Mass stops at Jesus and this is the problem; it stops at Jesus present among us, but it never touches on the second movement, God’s action in us, which is what counts the most, it being our ascension to God. There is no ascending movement in the Modern Mass. It is in fact, the terrible victory of Protestantism, first impeded by the Council of Trent but which is now practically complete.
The Sacrament isn’t denied, but is horribly distorted: it is no longer intended as Christ’s transforming action in us, but as His consoling presence. The aim of Christ’s action in us, which is to be transformed in Him, has been forgotten. Our transformation in Him is absolutely necessary though, since God the Father is glorified by His Word made man, Jesus Christ, and is not pleased with us if He doesn’t see His Word formed [in us]. “We have become not only Christians, but Christ” says St. Augustine: how many today are near this truth? how many sense the greatness of the work of grace in us? How many understand that this is the work?
Today the Sacrament is reduced to consoling us, the Mass is reduced to Jesus sharing everything with us, and, the demonic temptation is to transform Him into us. For this reason, it is incomprehensible, even to many priests in the Church, that some conditions for receiving the Sacraments exist, all of which are united to the intent of truly wishing to die to self so that Christ is affirmed in us. Today, thanks to the New Mass, everyone believes they have a right to the Sacraments, to be served by Christ, with no intent of serving Him.
The New Mass has favoured Naturalism, even if it’s pious; Christ is affirmed in word, but in action it’s as if He didn’t exist. And this is precisely heretical Protestantism, which doesn’t give credence to the transforming action of grace on our nature.
It is not enough then to celebrate the New Mass with devotion since it’s conceived as the Last Supper and not [the Sacrifice of] Calvary.
Calvary tells you that God sacrificed His only Son so that you might be pulled out of a world of sin, and, transformed in Him by the Grace descending from the Cross, therefore being saved, God willing.
The Last Supper without Calvary tells you that God comes into our midst; consequently you are important, your life and the life of the world is essential, nature is everything, seeing that God has come with His presence to serve it; this is how Naturalism is served, even if in a pious côté.
It truly is the victory of the “purged” Sacrament, initiated by Luther and his companions.
Moreover, the most dangerous among us are the devout Conservatives who think that with a “little touch-up” along traditional lines, this poisoning can be cured. [However]only the Mass of Tradition and not some surrogate saves the integrity of God’s action and makes us aware of it.
It is the duty of the priests and the lay faithful to protect without further delay God’s most precious gift, since time is running out.
Are you dense? I've identified as a Christian.
You're not a prot, nor a Catholic, yet you continuously attack the Catholic Church from your little secret sect.
When I see error, yes...as a Christian we are to point it out. Paul and John wrote against errors in the church.
That structure in the second picture in your homepage is an example of error. Catholics have made an idol of "Peter's Chair". I'm sure an idol of Mary is somewhere close by.
I betcha Peter would have that thing melted down in a heartbeat. Paul would roundly condemn it.
We won’t even go into the false beliefs regarding the apparition at Fatima. More error on the part of roman catholicism.
But you have already said you do attend some kind of “church” on Sundays.
No. You've only identified yourself as a heretic.
By their very nature, heretics do not see errors.
You’ve identified the problem with roman catholicism.
A heretic is one who follows Christ?? Wow. Just. Wow.
That’s the problem. I don’t believe you follow Christ.
Do you?
What do you mean by “that’s all that matters”?
The question remains....do you believe His promise of John 5:24?
Ah, good ‘ol Marian Horvat. According to her, the Apostle Paul is a Roman Catholic.
“St. Paul is severe in his condemnation of false teachers, e.g. Protestants,” we are told. Second Thessalonians 3:6, which says avoid association with those “walking disorderly” is taken to mean that Catholics should avoid non-Catholics. Does this make sense? Paul was having difficulty with three groups of people:
One, exr pagans in danger of lapsing back into paganism.
Two, Judaizers.
Three, Gnostics, who denied many Christian doctrines, including the birth of Jesus in the flesh.
None of these things have anything to do with Protestants.
Can Paul be regarded as a Roman Catholic?
The RCC teaches that Peter is not only an Apostle but the Chief Apostle. The New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia calls Peter the Prince of the Apostles. The RCC teaches that Bishops of Rome, or Popes, are the successors of St. Peter.
Paul never said that Peter is the head of the Christian Church on earth.
Paul never gave any Apostle a rank higher than Apostle.
Paul describes Peter, James and John as “pillars,” but makes it sound like they are equal. Galatians 2:9.
Paul never made submission to Peter a condition of salvation.
Paul never said anything about Peter having a successor.
Paul publicly disagreed with Peter on at least one occasion.
Instead of saying that Peter is head of the church, Paul says that Peter was sent to the Jews and he, Paul, was sent to the Gentiles. Paul claims to be the equal of Peter. Again, Galatians 2:9.
Jesus said that the distinguishing characteristic of HIS FOLLOWERS would be LOVE for one another. This was the commandment He gave before going through His passion ...
John 13
34 A new commandment I give to you, that you should love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love among one another.”
“He who hears you (Peter) hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me (Lk 10:16).” It could not be clearer: the Protestant who rejects the head, rejects Christ himself, and should not be granted the name Christian.”
I don’t think any Protestant rejects Peter, or his status as Jesus’s right hand man and Apostle. Horvat is apparently lumping Peter’s presumed succssors, the Popes , with him. Jesus personally chose Peter, did He personally choose the various Popes after him? No, they were chosen by fallible men.
IMO “heretic” is a bit much. Schismatic, maybe.
Wasn’t Luke 10:16 referring to the 70 additional disciples that were sent out?
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.