Inculturation at Papal Masses; next, Poland and St. Faustina

National Catholic Reporter ^ | 8/7/2002 | John L. Allen

[ultima ratio]

No, but you are--you just don't know it yet. When was the last time you genuflected--or sang Tantum Ergo, or prayed before the Blessed Sacrament? Have you located the tabernacle in your church yet?

[drstevej]

The next Pope does seem to be pivotal one way or the other. Thanks for your thoughts.

[drstevej]

*** Lots and lots of babies.***

Following the Church's teaching against contraception, are they? If the SSPX is attracting young families elsewhere are is the case where you attend then that is significant in terms of the future.

Is this a concern over kids in light of recent scandals? A flight to a perceived 'conservative' safe haven. Just a suggestion. But I think the kid's safety issue with all the coverage in the media is significant and growing esoecially as the US Bishops waffle.

[St.Chuck]

When was the last time you genuflected--or sang Tantum Ergo, or prayed before the Blessed Sacrament? Have you located the tabernacle in your church yet?

You've got to put the script down. Do you honestly believe that these practices are extinct? Uncommon? You have demonstrated yet another schismatic tendency, that of ignorant prejudice. You are ignorant about the catholic church, and you are prejudiced in that you believe the worse about it. Whoever wrote your script does not know what they are talking about. That you would ask me those questions indicates that you don't read my posts. Sheesh.

[ultima ratio]

You are proving my point. Canon Law is the POPE'S own law whereby he judges others. If it says an individual incurs no penalty if he believes there is a state of necessity, then that's the law, it is the Pope's own law. If he does not abrogate this law, then it is the bottom line. This is why top Roman canonists say the Archbishop incurred no penalty.

Now I have a question for you: why did the Pope want to prohibit the consecrations of traditional bishops? He had not acted to oppose the many apostate priests who were being elevated to the purple left and right all across Europe. He had not acted to prohibit the elevation of many actively gay bishops in America, some of whom had records of sex abuse charges at the time of their consecrations. He has recently awarded the red hat to a man who doubts Christ's divinity and the reality of the Resurrection. So why was he so set against SSPX consecrations--especially when an apostolic delegate had only a short while before visited the Econe and written up a glowing report of its orthodoxy and piety? That is the 64 dollar question you people should be asking.

[ultima ratio]

If you think there was no state of necessity, you are living in a dream world. Pope Paul VI himself admitted the smoke of Satan had entered the sanctuary. The wreckage was everywhere and was self-evident. It still is! Do you think the Archbishop didn't know this? Of course there was a state of necessity--and it was objectively provable by anyone imbued with a sense of justice. But that proof was not going to come out of modernist Rome. Rome is still blathering about a springtime! But the conciliar Church, is by any fair and objective measure a wintry landscape of apostasy and corruption. Another couple of dozen public relations globe-trots on the part of this celebrity-Pope won't change this.

[ultima ratio]

Of course these practices still exist in many parishes. I wrote that comment tongue in cheek to some extent. But they are customs that are fast dsapppearing--together with the doctrines that underly them. I attended a major Catholic seminary where the tabernacle was kept in a small room in the basement. Nobody ever genuflected and we wore t-shirts and jeans to Mass--except when the cardinal visited. Have you read the Gallup poll published in Catholic World Report a few years ago on the astonishing number of Catholics who no longer believe in the Real Presence? They are slowly turning into Protestants. And why not? The Novus Ordo has conditioned them, permeated as it is by a Protestant, not Catholic, theological perspective.

[ultima ratio]

You write, "Protestants make the same charge against faithful Catholics" -- i.e., that Catholics worship the Pope. The charge has validity when they place the Pope before the Faith itself and have trouble distinguishing between the two. Many on this site would willingly deny an article of faith if the Pope asked them to do so. If Rome affirms the recent bishops' declaration on relations with the Jews, how many of you will twist yourselves into pretzels to justify such a turn-around in doctrine? Your intelligence will play no active part in your rallying around the Pope. Neither will common sense. Most of you have already fully accepted papal novelties like praying with false religionists, as if this were an acceptable orthodox practice instead of a scandalous affront to tradition and piety--not to speak of an offense against the First Commandment. If you will accept this without a murmur, you will accept anything.

[ultima ratio]

We have the same phenomenon at our chapel--young families dominate for the most part. And they are very savvy about the Faith. It's the same everywhere. In a few years we will have doubled in size. Fr. Scott's most recent letter in Regina Coeli spoke of 22 new schools instituted in just one year. That's incredible.

[ultima ratio]

Oh, there was a necessity all right. The Archbishop was in advanced years. He knew no priests from the Econe would be ordained after his demise unless he acted to assure his succession. The modernists had already given every indication it was out to destroy traditionalism. And the Pontifical Council knows this. It is certainly duplicitous to ignore this dimension of the debate, as if the Pope were not acting for political, rather than religious, reasons. As for the state of necessity needing to be objectively proven--what further proof was needed besides a Church falling apart because of modernist innovations? The evidence was everywhere. Econe was established precisely because orthodox seminarians faithful to the deposit of faith could not get ordained anywhere in Europe. To pretend there was no objective crisis is dishonest on the face of it!

What I find disgusting is that apostates and openly active gays had no trouble getting consecrated and ran up against no opposition in Rome at this time. Bishops all around the globe routinely ignored papal commands and received no disciplinary action whatever. So I ask again--why was this action taken against Lefebvre and not the others? His priests and seminarians were devout and orthodox. His seminary caused not a breath of scandal. Why was it targeted for destruction if not precisely BECAUSE it was the memory of the Church itself, the last bastion of traditional Catholicism to survive the conciliar wrecking-ball?

[sinkspur]

Do you know a better form of government?

Yes. A representative democracy.

Theocracies have regularly turned out very badly.

[sinkspur]

The Pope is beloved by the faithful. But he won't be around forever--and then the roof could cave in.

Yes. The roof could cave in for the SSPX.

The next Pope is likely to tell you clowns to pound sand.

[ultima ratio]

Doesn't matter if the next pope decrees what you pope-worshipers would wish in your favorite pipedream. The faith is the faith is the faith. It's what was handed down by Tradition through the ages, not the invention of a modernist agenda. This would apply regardless of how many popes speak up to the contrary.

"If anyone, even an angel come down from Heaven, should preach a gospel other than the one I have preached to you, let him be anathema." --St. Paul, letter to the Galatians.

[sinkspur]

Do you mean like the one we live in?

Yes. I mean EXACTLY like the one we live in.

The one that has allowed the slaughter of nearly 40 million innocents in the last 30 years?

The "my-way-or-the-highway" types, who scream because George W. Bush does tries to govern the whole country and not just the evangelical right, should support him in his effort to nominate judges who will work to return abortion to the states, where it belongs.

I don't approve of dictatorships, Catholic or otherwise.