 |
| [Cardinal Sarah at the Abbey of Saint Mary of Lagrasse] |
Posted on 08/14/2021 7:32:53 AM PDT by ebb tide
Cardinal Robert Sarah
Doubt has taken hold of Western thought. Intellectuals and politicians alike describe the same impression of collapse. Faced with the breakdown of solidarity and the disintegration of identities, some turn to the Catholic Church. ... But is the Church capable of responding to these calls? Certainly, she has already played this role of guardian and transmitter of civilization. ...
|
| [Cardinal Sarah at the Abbey of Saint Mary of Lagrasse] |
Without a sacred foundation, every bond becomes fragile and fickle. Some ask the Catholic Church to play this solid foundation role. They would like to see her assume a social function, namely to be a coherent system of values, a cultural and aesthetic matrix. But the Church has no other sacred reality to offer than her faith in Jesus, God made man. Her sole goal is to make possible the encounter of men with the person of Jesus. Moral and dogmatic teaching, as well as mystical and liturgical patrimony, are the setting and the means of this fundamental and sacred encounter. Christian civilization is born of this encounter. Beauty and culture are its fruits. ...
What is sacred for the Church, then, is the unbroken chain that links her with certainty to Jesus. A chain of faith without rupture or contradiction, a chain of prayer and liturgy without breakage or disavowal. Without this radical continuity, what credibility could the Church still claim? ...
This is undoubtedly the reason for which Benedict XVI could authoritatively affirm:
“In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place.” ...
At a time when some theologians are seeking to reopen the liturgy wars by pitting the missal revised by the Council of Trent against the one in use since 1970, it is urgent to recall this. If the Church is not capable of preserving the peaceful continuity of her link with Christ, she will be unable to offer the world “the sacred which unites souls,” according to the words of Goethe.
Beyond the quarrel over rites, the credibility of the Church is at stake. If she affirms the continuity between what is commonly called the Mass of St. Pius V and the Mass of Paul VI, then the Church must be able to organize their peaceful cohabitation and their mutual enrichment. If one were to radically exclude one in favor of the other, if one were to declare them irreconcilable, one would implicitly recognize a rupture and a change of orientation. But then the Church could no longer offer the world that sacred continuity, which alone can give her peace. By keeping alive a liturgical war within herself, the Church loses her credibility and becomes deaf to the call of men. Liturgical peace is the sign of the peace that the Church can bring to the world.
What is at stake is therefore much more serious than a simple question of discipline. If she were to claim a reversal of her faith or of her liturgy, in what name would the Church dare address the world? Her only legitimacy is her consistency in her continuity.
Moreover, if the bishops, who are in charge of the cohabitation and mutual enrichment of the two liturgical forms, do not exercise their authority to this effect, they run the risk of no longer appearing as shepherds, guardians of the faith they have received and of the sheep entrusted to them, but as political leaders: commissars of the ideology of the moment rather than guardians of the perennial tradition. They risk losing the trust of men of good will. ...
In liturgical matters, neither pastoral violence nor partisan ideology has ever produced fruits of unity. The suffering of the faithful and the expectations of the world are too great to engage in these dead-end paths. No one is too much in the Church of God!
Ping
This is a gutsy movie by Card. Sarah... calling on the bishops to defy Bergoglio on T.C.
Praying that a miracle happens and this man becomes the next pope.
*move, not movie.
Remove the heretic.
Sarah for Pope! Vigano for Pope! Schneider for Pope! Burke for Pope! Any one of them!
Sarah, period. The other 3 do not have the leadership qualities.
Request permission to post to this thread, raised Mainline, former Evangelical, trying to convert to Catholicism (not as easy as it looks).
I have one observation to make about all this and will not engage in polemics.
No problem. Go ahead.
Growth, rather rupture, in liturgy is what the Novus Ordo was meant to be.
The issue is not with the Novus Ordo, but with its abuse.
The Church’s invite is, in the mind of many, best heard in one’s own language. That message is in its articulation of its faith and morals as well as its liturgy. It is understood too in its members living it day to day.
How many converts have been lured by the Church’s truth by attending a faithful Novus Ordo Mass, who would have just been confused by a Latin Mass?
This is my opinion. The charism of deciding the answer to the questions of liturgy is found only!!! in the sitting Pope.
We would all do better to leave it in his hands and demonstrate humble obedience to the only decider.
No, we wouldn't; not with Bergoglio. Just look at what he's letting the Germans get away with in their schism.
For someone who was baptized and went to Sunday School until age 14 in a Congregational Church with a mixed Dutch Reformed + Lutheran heritage congregation, it is apparent that the post V II Church, at least in Europe and North America, bears many marks of a protestant sect.
The key is the need to EXPLAIN things to an “enlightened” population, to rationalize the non-rational aspects of the faith so as to bring the hesitant modern folks along.
This is (superficially) a reasonable strategy. Mormons have used “milk before meat” for years, but they have a core of actual believers to keep things on an even keel.
The problem with rationalizing, apparent since Descartes and modernized in the early-mid 20th century by Teilhard de Jardain and many others is that faith is a fragile thing, easily lost once questioned.
It is odd, but true, that protestants who become disillusioned with their local church just start another one, whereas Catholics, it would appear (Ireland, Quebec, France, now Italy) leave their non-local church for atheism or secular hedonism (two sides of the same coin, I guess).
Anyway, I’ve done RCIA twice, both led by women, both religious, both anxious to convince their students that the Catholic Church doesn’t really mean or believe most of the things she teaches, especially about the “down there stuff”.
I have said to friend that Francis is a protestant, arguing that it takes one to know one. I’ve also asked that if V II wanted to borrow from protestantism, “why did they only take the bad parts”? For example: Would you rather sing Isaac Watts and Charles Wesley, or Delores Duffner and Marty Haugen?
I hope I haven’t offended anyone.
I know you do not like Bergoglio, nor do I. But day after day people disobey Christ if! they disobey Bergoglio on the Liturgy. All of Bergoglio’s heterodox spewings he tosses out, apart from the orthodoxy of an ex Cathedra proclamation or a signing off on the documents of an Ecumenical Council, are subject to criticism
That leaves a lot to be desired from him. He spews heterodoxy confusingly.
Maybe Sarah can be our next pontiff. We can pray.
Not too many, I would think.
How many Catholics have left the church since VCII? And how many of them do you think were attending the TLM?
That's outright papolatry! Comparing Bergoglio to Jesus Christ.
But day after day people disobey Christ if! they disobey Bergoglio on the Liturgy.
That’s outright papolatry! Comparing Bergoglio to Jesus Christ.
...............
You think narrowly. To not see the difference between the charism conferred on Popes about the liturgy and to call respect for same and obedience to it papolatry is an accusation which could make one wonder about your understanding of the Church, its history and teachings.
Based on what I said in that same post about Bergoglio’s spewings, you should know I do not worship the Pope.
“Charism conferred on Popes about the liturgy”
Where did you come up with such nonsense?
So each pope can have his own, different charism about the liturgy? How come the TLM remained essentialy intact for 1500 years with just organic development until Montini came along and had a completely different charism from his predecessors.
I’m so sorry to hear of your experiences in RCIA. Unfortunately, this is all too common. My son-in-law had the same experience, but my daughter received a good religious education from the Sisters of the Visitation, and was able to keep him on the path.
Is there an SSPX presence near you?
Responding to the “Mass” Exodus
In taking stock of the crisis, Stephen Bullivant traces the steps of our decline for us, drawing together the many contributing factors, in his book Mass Exodus: Catholic Disaffiliation in Britain and America since Vatican II (Oxford, 2019).
(emphasis mine)
“I do not worship the Pope.”
It’s a good thing, considering that we do not have a pope just now.
He has excommunicated himself latae sententiae, and is no longer Catholic, much less pope.
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.