[Catholic Caucus] Bishop Strickland: My refusal to cancel the Latin Mass is one of the reasons I was removed

LifeSite News ^ | November 27, 2023 | LifeSite News Staff

[Alberta's Child]

I will have to do some research, but I suspect the "new Roman Missal" described in Missale Romanum bears very little resemblance to what has become commonplace in the Novus Ordo Mass these days.

Even Paul VI explicitly includes Latin references in his specific instruction about the Consecration later in that document:

Thus, in each Eucharistic Prayer, we wish that the words be pronounced thus: over the bread: ACCIPITE ET MANDUCATE EX HOC OMNES: HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM, QUOD PRO VOBIS TRADETUR; over the chalice: ACCIPITE ET BIBITE EX EO OMNES: HIC EST ENIM CALIX SANGUINIS MEI NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI, QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDETUR IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM. HOC FACITE IN MEAM COMMEMORATIONEM. The words MYSTERIUM FIDEI, taken from the context of the words of Christ the Lord, and said by the priest, serve as an introduction to the acclamation of the faithful.

[ebb tide]

The former granted permissions.

The latter issued a mass prohibition while imposing a fabricated “bogus ordo” mass drafted by a Freemason.

Big difference.

[ebb tide]

You are sourcing an article written by a sedevacanatist.

[Ultra Sonic 007]

So? The writer quotes approved Church authorities from prior to Vatican II, and cites the documents that promulgated the Mass of Paul VI in their own words.

Are they wrong or not? Is there a flaw in the argument presented? If so, please point it out.

[NorthMountain]

that there has been a huge groundswell of support for the TLM among young Catholics.

When I assist at Latin Mass, I see more children than adults. Most of the adults are parents of young children. Relatively speaking, I'm one of the old geezers ... and I'm not that old ...

[ebb tide]

Cekada doesn't consider Montini to by an "approved" Church authority.

Do you?

[ebb tide]

We wish that these Our decrees and prescriptions may be firm and effective now and in the future, notwithstanding, to the extent necessary, the apostolic constitutions and ordinances issued by Our predecessors, and other prescriptions, even those deserving particular mention and derogation." - Paul VI, Missale Romanum, 1969

What do you think "to the extent necessary" means? And why was it "necessary" to suppress a universal 1500 year-old Mass?

[Ultra Sonic 007]

He is asking those who hold Paul VI to be Pope, yet reject Missale Romanum as an evil or non-Catholic rite, to be logically consistent with the standards demanded by Catholic doctrine.

[Ultra Sonic 007]

What extent did the Roman Congregations and the diocesan ordinaries deem “necessary”, based on their actions in the ‘70s?

[ebb tide]

Let’s cut to the chase.

Do you think the Traditional Latin Mass was ever abrogated?

Yes or No?

[Ultra Sonic 007]

Have I not made it clear?

I don’t believe Paul VI was a true Pope, so he lacked the jurisdiction to do so in truth.

HOWEVER, assuming for the sake of argument that he was Pope, he made it clear that the Novus Ordo Missae was lawfully promulgated, and his liturgical legislation was implemented accordingly.

Save for the few exceptions carved out in legislation, the TLM was de jure AND de facto abrogated as the universal liturgy of the Latin Church.

[ebb tide]

I don’t believe Paul VI was a true Pope, so he lacked the jurisdiction to do so in truth.

Do you believe Pope Benedict XVI to have been a true Pope when he issued his MOTU PROPRIO: SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM?

If not, why not?

[Ultra Sonic 007]

No.

The reasons are manifold.

- His insistence (as outlined in Summorum Pontificum) that the Novus Ordo Missae and the Traditional Latin Mass are both two different forms of the same Roman Rite, even though liturgically and doctrinally, they profess two different religions.

- As noted in the CDF document "RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH" (which Benedict XVI explicitly approved and ordered to be published), he still defended and maintained that Lumen Gentium is orthodox, even though it changed Catholic doctrine with regards to the unity of the Church (namely, that the Church of Christ "subsists in" the Catholic Church, with the various Orthodox and Protestant sects treated as having "partial" communion; prior to Vatican II, the Catholic Church was always uniquely identified as the sole Church of Christ, and the various Orthodox and Protestant sects were properly called schismatics and heretics who did not possess the true faith).

- His scandalous and active participation in Islamic prayer at the Blue Mosque in Turkey in 2006 (having removed his shoes, received instruction on the basics of Muslim prayer, and turned towards Mecca in a posture of Islamic prayer, making no public signs that he was engaging in a Catholic prayer whatsoever; this action by itself in a saner era would have him branded as suspect of heresy, if not of tacit apostasy):

- On that note, his scandalous participation in the Assisi interreligious meeting in 2011 (following the example of his predecessor John Paul II from 25 years prior), which would have also been deemed an example of tacit apostasy. For a true Pope to pray alongside pagans, heretics, infidels, and schismatics — at an event not dedicated to their conversion to the one true religion, but one dedicated to 'praying for peace', as though peace is possible without Christ — would have been an unthinkable display of religious indifferentism, which has been condemned strenuously by numerous Popes.

I could go on.

[ebb tide]

Do you believe Pope Pius XII was a true Pope when he allowed the Freemason, Bugnini, to make the reforms of the Holy Week liturgy in 1955?

The same Bugnini who crafted the bogus ordo of Paul VI?

[Ultra Sonic 007]

Yes, because Pius XII was a true Pope, and Paul VI was not.

The 1955 Holy Week liturgy, lawfully promulgated by a true Pope, therefore cannot be dangerous to one's faith.

Or do you think that the Holy Week liturgy as revised in 1955 contains incentives to impiety or changes to the actual substance of the sacraments (as the Novus Ordo Missae does)?

[ebb tide]

Yes, because Pius XII was a true Pope, and Paul VI was not.

Say who? You?

[ebb tide]

Yes, because Pius XII was a true Pope, and Paul VI was not.

How about John XXIII? Was he a true pope or just a bumbling idiot?

[Ultra Sonic 007]

John XXIII’s status is more ambiguous, given the oddities surrounding the conclave in which he was elected.

I’m of the opinion that he was not a true Pope. (I also don’t think he was a bumbling idiot, either.)

[ebb tide]

P.S.

How about Pope John Paul I, who was murdered 33 days after being elected?

Was he a true Pope? If not, why not?

[ebb tide]

John XXIII’s status is more ambiguous, given the oddities surrounding the conclave in which he was elected.

I know all about those oddities, i.e., Cardinal Siri.

It's also obvious there were oddities about Bergoglio's election.

But why do you give Roncalli the benefit of the doubt, but not Bergoglio?

Antipope Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli aka John XXIII