Posted on 04/16/2019 9:51:18 AM PDT by Repent and Believe
I was on a train back into Paris this afternoon when I started receiving a number of messages on my phone asking if I had heard about Notre Dame. The roof was on fire, I was told, and it might be difficult to put out. But the first thought that came to mind was that all things happen by God's will or His permission. Nothing is random. Everything has a purpose. This was Monday of Holy Week. Could I help but think of Our Lord's words, "Weep not for me, but for your children"?
Just yesterday in the liturgy Our Lord was triumphantly welcomed into Jerusalem, a city He so loved. A city whose denizens He wished to gather as "the hen doth gather her chickens under her wings." A city that would not know, would not accept the "things that are to thy peace."
France, in the person of King Louis XIV, that most disastrous of Capetian monarchs, refused the request of Our Lord to be consecrated to the Sacred Heart. One hundred years later his descendant was cruelly murdered. Paris, where Our Lady appeared to St. Catherine Laboure the day after King Charles X was chased out of office by the mob, missed Our Lady's message and continued spreading her errors, born of the so-called "Enlightenment" and come to life in the Terror. Notre Dame de Paris, one of the most celebrated cathedrals in the land, has not hosted the true sacrifice of the Mass for half a century, the anniversary of Paul VI's promulgation of the New Mass having passed only two weeks ago. Can we be surprised that God abandons a building that has abandoned Him, a building in a city that is in the capital of the country that refused his gentle yoke, then and now?
The second thought that came to mind was the Basilica of St. Paul's Outside the Walls. For those who have visited it, it feels like a new building compared to the ancient churches of the Eternal City. That's because, relatively speaking, it is brand new. In 1823 the more than 1400 year old structure (making it more than 600 years older than Notre Dame by comparison) burnt almost entirely, due to some mistake of a workman. The building was magnificently rebuilt due to a successful worldwide appeal of the Holy Father, but that extravagance lent (and still does) a feeling of a museum to the building rather than a house of worship. Thinking of it reminded me that all things pass in this life, and more importantly, we have been promised that the new heaven and earth will not come after a flood, but after a great fire, the smallest of previews we saw this evening in the burning of our cathedral here in Paris.
My final thought turned to Holy Week, which we are currently in, and to the mysteries of Our Lord's Passion that await us in the coming days. Mysteries that the small congregation here in Paris will contemplate in a rented hall, as we have long since outgrown the small oratory where weekday Masses are celebrated. Yet even in these circumstances, we have been preceded by our ancestors in the Faith. I close with the words of St. Athanasius:
"May God console you! ... What saddens you ... is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the premises – but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith? The true Faith, obviously...Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."
"May God console you! ... Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."
Do you agree with this author that all the Masses celebrated at ND for the past 50 years have been eucharistic sacrilege?
“The second thought that came to mind was the Basilica of St. Paul’s Outside the Walls. For those who have visited it, it feels like a new building compared to the ancient churches of the Eternal City. That’s because, relatively speaking, it is brand new. In 1823 the more than 1400 year old structure (making it more than 600 years older than Notre Dame by comparison) burnt almost entirely, due to some mistake of a workman. The building was magnificently rebuilt due to a successful worldwide appeal of the Holy Father, but that extravagance lent (and still does) a feeling of a museum to the building rather than a house of worship.”
A little bit different situation, but with some simularities - The Frauenkirche in Dresden was rebuilt, solely by donations, after the fall of the wall (the commies had no need for churches except for grain storage or conversion to museums). Is it now a house of worship or some sort of secular monument?
Protestants, faithful to Tradition, would disagree with St. Athanasius. :O)
So long as it isn’t caucused, it is more a sign of the times.
One of my thoughts yesterday was how the level of apostasy in France and much of Europe is so great. But the damage to the ND Cathedral is viewed with great shock and horror by many who reject Christ.
While the structure was damaged by flames, the true Believers in Christ Jesus have been saved from destruction and eternal damnation. In a way, this may turn out for good IF unbelievers realize that faith in a building or a government or a one’s own works or deeds will provide salvation.
It is the Word of God - Jesus Christ Himself who saves souls. Don’t be deceived or distracted by the worldly sideshows.
I was aghast when Macron said something about rebuilding for the glory of France. If that's all it is, then --- to paraphrase Flannery O'Connor --- "to hell with it."
But if unbelievers are drawn to Jesus through this gripping 800 year narrative --- the honor of France's Christian heritage (of late so much dishonored), the beauty Christ's temples and horror of their destruction --- then may all turn to Him and live.
"Late have I loved Thee, Beauty so ancient and so new! Late have I loved Thee!"
Sadly for many, many souls today, yes.
This snippet begins to explain:
Now here’s the rub: According to perennial Catholic teaching, it is not possible for the Catholic Church to undergo a substantial change. Her teachings cannot change in essence; she cannot contradict or abandon what she taught before; she cannot offer a “new religion” to her followers.
In response to the phenomenon of the Vatican II revolution, there are three essential lines of thought that have been proposed as “solutions” to understanding the situation. This is not now the place or time to critique or justify any of them. For now, we want to just describe them: (1) despite appearances, nothing has really substantially changed, and any interpretation of Vatican II that arrives at the conclusion that there has been a substantial change must be incorrect; (2) we must oppose (resist) these substantial changes and stick to the traditional, age-old teaching instead and ignore the Vatican II novelties while recognizing, however, that the authorities in the Vatican are legitimate and genuine Roman Catholic authorities — we just cannot agree with them on these points; (3) because it is impossible for the Catholic Church to change substantially, and because Vatican II constitutes such an impossible substantial change, it is necessary to conclude that the authority which gave us Vatican II is not in fact the legitimate Catholic authority; that is to say, the “Popes” which gave us Vatican II are not true Popes, nor are their successors, who have implemented and expanded this new religion that has its roots in the council. In fact, the entire religion that now occupies the Vatican and the official structures of the Catholic Church throughout the world is false — it is not the Catholic religion at all, and its putative authorities are not Catholics but heretical usurpers.
(From https://novusordowatch.org/start-here/)
That’s good summary of the three possible interpretations of Vat. II.
But I asked about you. Your judgment of it is...? And your judgment of the Novus Ordo liturgy is...?
I stand with the third interpretation. And that, of course is to say that the N.O. liturgy IS as you have said it.
Fortunately, on the other hand, there are, though few in number (yet growing) Priests and Bishops with whom a faithful Catholic can stand, and from whom he can receive legitimate Sacraments, while mourning that we await a true Pope, and who happily still EMBRACES the doctrine on the Papacy and the numerous TRUE Popes prior to A.D. 1958.
Certainly that a 19th century spire collapsing and the only thing on the inside of the Church to be taken out is the free-standing altar and some pews could be taken to support this position. But it isn’t the only way it could be interpreted.
And someone in the running for worst Pope ever is still Pope. He has to be to be in contention.
With friends like this, who needs enemies.
So, you think Pius XII (d. 1958) was the last true pope?
Yes.
Your argument is fundamentally flawed because the word you chose to use has many different meanings. As a philosopher pursuing wisdom, one must use words that have the requisite precision for the task at hand. “Substance” and “substantial” are too ambiguous to be relied upon to posit that the Holy Spirit has abandoned the Church or allowed the Perpetual Sacrifice to fail.
I was in Notre Dame two years ago. One day as a tourist, seeing“THE” Crown of Thorns, and the next day with 15,000 pilgrims attending at a solemn high mass that launched the annual Chartres Pgrimage, whose sole purpose is to pray and do penance for the return of the Latin mass throughout the world. Yes I did receive the Body of Christ in that splendid edifice, dedicated to the Eucharist, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and as a suitable reliquary for the awesome relics preserved within.
So a proper response to massacres, pogroms, and genocide is to wonder what God had in mind. Ok.
Pius XII (d. 1958) was the last true pope.
That is the only doctrinally accurate interpretation of how six successive men, who in all worldly standards appear to hold the papal office, could introduce and uphold practices that damage and mislead the flock of our Lord Jesus Christ.
As you may know, the Holy Ghost protects the pope from issuing error to the Bride of Christ. (This is official Church doctrine.) Otherwise what is the point of the office of the Vicar of Christ? It has been noted that even wicked men who once held the office never were found to TEACH error to the Church, and even, in spite of their sinful lives have been found to render judgements consistent with all that of all true Popes. Much of this question was reviewed at the Vatican (I) council.
It is thus that a Catholic really ought not to be played by the popularly-followed imposters of the Vatican II stripe. That is to say, it is supportive of apostasy and schism and heresy to even formally use the title “Pope Francis”. I typically use the terms “Bergoglio” and “Ratzinger” instead, for example.
I suggest checking out this presentation which actually dives into the issue to clarify what the author is refering to as far as the serious wrongdoing of “the changes”. Thank you.
The Sermons on Vatican II
Episode 1: “Substantial or Accidental Changes?” & “The Fundamental Error of Vatican II”
https://www.truerestoration.org/vatican-2-part-1/
The key distinction is between what is Sacrament and what is sacramental.
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.