Posted on 01/30/2021 4:50:06 PM PST by ebb tide
“Either you are with the Church and therefore you follow the Council, or you interpret it in your own way, according to your desire, you do not stand with the Church.”
From Vatican News:
Pope Francis called on catechists to “pray and think creatively about a catechesis centred on the kerygma, which looks to the future of our communities, so that they may be ever more rooted in the Gospel, communities that are fraternal, and inclusive.”
The Holy Father was speaking to members of the National Catechetical Office of the Italian Bishops’ Conference (CEI), which this year celebrates the 60th anniversary of its foundation. “This anniversary is a precious occasion for remembering, giving thanks for gifts received, and renewing the spirit of proclamation,” the Pope said, before offering several points of reflection “that I hope will help you in your work” in the coming years.
First, Pope Francis emphasized the relationship between catechesis and kerygma, the proclamation of the Word of God. “Catechesis,” he said, “is the echo of the Word of God.”
At the heart of the kerygma is a Person, Jesus Christ; catechesis, therefore, “is a privileged space for a personal encounter with Him.” Catechesis, then, “must be interwoven with personal relationships.” Catechists are witnesses who have themselves encountered Jesus, and wish to lead others to encounter Him. He emphasized, too, that catechesis must be given in the language of the people, “in dialect, that is the language that comes from the heart.”
To do so, he said, we must remember elements of catechesis that are most needed to day: expressing God’s saving love, appealing to freedom, marked by joy. Similarly, this demands “certain attitudes” on the part of catechists, including approachability, openness to dialogue, patience, warmth, and welcome.
The Pope’s second point had to do with catechesis and the future. In 2020, the church in Italy marked the 50th anniversary of the “renewal of catechesis” following the Second Vatican Council. “The catechesis inspired by the Council,” said Pope Francis, “is continually listening to the heart of the man, always with an attentive ear, always seeking to renew itself.”
Pope Francis insisted: “This is the Magisterium. The Council is the Magisterium of the Church. Either you are with the Church and therefore you follow the Council, or you interpret it in your own way, according to your desire, you do not stand with the Church.” He asked that there be no concessions “to those who try to present a catechesis that does not agree with the Magisterium of the Church.”
Another part of the book, however, will also be of much interest to the Catholic world, inasmuch as Joseph Ratzinger discusses in that section his own role at the Second Vatican Council and even the often destructive consequences of this Church event. Only recently, in March of 2016, he had already made some critical remarks about the Council which soon attracted world-wide attention. For, Ratzinger had described a “two-sided deep crisis,” especially with regard to the Church’s own missionary work following the Second Vatican Council.
Ping
Utterly bizarre that they feel the constant need to sell everyone on the wonderful “gifts” of Vat2. It’d be like the Coca-Cola Company decades later still trying to convince everyone that New Coke was a great idea.
If you accept Vatican 2,
you think your Church is alive.
If you reject Vatican 2,
you admit your Church is dead.
Were my forefathers wrong?
Compare this to the Novus Ordo of Vat II and the partaking in the hand since then:
A.) 1.) St. Sixtus 1 (circa 115): “The Sacred Vessels are not to be handled by others than those consecrated to the Lord.”
2.) St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the Church (330-379): “The right to receive Holy Communion in the hand is permitted only in times of persecution.”
St. Basil the Great considered Communion in the hand so irregular that he did not hesitate to consider it a grave fault.
3.) The Council of Saragossa (380): Excommunicated anyone who dared continue *receiving Holy Communion by hand.*
4.) This was *confirmed* by the Synod of Toledo.
5.) Saint Leo the Great read the sixth chapter of Saint John’s Gospel as referring to the Eucharist (as all the Church Fathers did).
In a preserved sermon on John 6 (Sermon 9), Saint Leo says: “Hoc enim ore sumitur quod fide creditur” (Serm. 91.3). This is translated strictly as: “This indeed is received by means of the mouth which we believe by means of faith. “Ore” is here in the ablative and in the context it denotes instrumentation. So then, the *mouth* is the means by which the Holy Eucharist is received.
6.) The Synod of Rouen (650): Condemned Communion in the hand to halt widespread abuses that occurred from this practice, and as a safeguard against *sacrilege.*
The Council of Rouen (650): “Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layman or laywoman but *only in their mouths.”*
7.) The 6th Ecumenical Council, at Constantinople (680-681): Forbade the faithful to take the Sacred Host in their hand, threatening transgressors *with excommunication.*
8.) St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274): “Out of reverence towards this Sacrament [the Holy Eucharist], *nothing touches it,* but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this Sacrament.” (Summa Theologica, Part III, Q. 82, Art. 3, Rep. Obj. 8.)
9.) The Council of Trent (1545-1565): “The fact that only the priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an *Apostolic Tradition”.*
Now this:
B.) Protestant Pachamama schismatic modernists are like Luther and deny adherence to all popes in concert with councils past as given in A, which say no to unconsecrated hands touching sacred vessels, say no to hands receving communuion except in times of persecution, etc. All of these cannot be expressed any differently. Truth is truth except for modernist relativists. Sin is sin, per Sacred Scripture, Tradition, etc.
Ecumenical Counsels, the Magisterium, Sacred Tradition, or the solemn teachings of supreme pontiffs are binding to the faithful:
“But when either the Roman Pontiff or the Body of Bishops together with him defines a judgment, they pronounce it in accordance with Revelation itself, which all are obliged to abide by and be in conformity with, that is, the Revelation which as written or orally handed down is transmitted in its entirety through the legitimate succession of bishops and especially in care of the Roman Pontiff himself, and which under the guiding light of the Spirit of truth is religiously preserved and faithfully expounded in the Church.”
All of 1-9 are in agreement. The popes in concert with the councils are in agreement, and popes before and after each council are in agreement and Trent is the capstone that by citing “Apostolic Tradition” anchors them in the New Testament making it irreversible forever.
And this:
C.) Finally, the past popes and councils worked together in agreement on 1-9 I listed above, and popes before and after them agreed with them in accordance with the quoted section in B. Once they declared certain actions involved with the Eucharist service to be sin, sacrilege, mortal sin, excommunicable offenses, and so on, it was sin. Period. Something can’t be sin one year and not sin the next.
The Council of Trent cited Apostolic Tradition as a capstone against heretics like Luther, thus for people now to make the things said in 1-9 to not be sin, mortal sin, etc, (those declared in 1-9 to be sin, mortal sin, etc, to do) would be akin to saying that what St. Peter and St. Paul said were sin are no longer sin. Thus for people now to say what 1-9 declared to be sins aren’t sins would be like St. Peter and Paul writing that something was sin and people now saying it isn’t and challenging them.
Truth isn’t relativistic, and A-C is 99% of church history, thus greater than Vat II.
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.