Texas Pastor Removed Over Latin Masses

Seattle Catholic ^ | July 4, 2003 | Peter Miller

[BlackElk]

Yes and the St. Joseph Foundation of San Antonio, Texas exists, with donor support, to pursue these cases in the Church courts for the aggrieved (throughout our country) who need not pay for their services AND they have a successful track record.

[ultima ratio]

Where do you think the Novus Ordo came from? It was concocted by Rome for the appeasement of Protestants. Do you think these bishops have sprung spontaneously from the head of Zeus? Do you imagine Rome didn't know their mindset when they were elevated, that they were not the products of seminaries and theological innovations as remote from Catholic Tradition as their Baptist or Lutheran counterparts?

Rome supports the Fiorenzas, the Adamecs, the Mahonys, the Kaspers, at every turn--to the detriment of the faith. That has been made painfully clear. Only when these men are outed by the media does Rome take belated action. Otherwise it supports their endless chipping-away at the Catholic faith, first by offering only weak-kneed reproof, then buckling-under to the radical changes--all in the direction of aligning the Catholic liturgy with Protestant theology.

Besides, look at what Rome actually does--not what it says--even in an encyclical. It complains about liturgical abuses, then organizes outdoor papal Masses rife with the worst abuses. It gave the red hat to Kasper--but it fired Bisig and his traditional theologians. It puts out a barrage of p.r. praise for the traditional Mass--but will not lift a pinky to make it more accessible. All this should tell you something.

You want to blame the second-tier of management. But the big boss is the real problem. He has spent twenty-five years giving out mixed signals, saying one thing, doing another. Even the encyclical on the Eucharist was a repetition of a declaration he had made twenty years ago. All that while he has taken no action to move the Church around in a more orthodox direction.

[narses]

Well, we can see the real world intruding again. While Deacon Sinkspur insists that the Novus Ordo corrected the mistakes of the Church Liturgy in the Tridentine Mass (that is your position Sink, yes?) the Good Bishop protects his flock from those errors with vigor. If you see the Tridentine Rite as HARMFUL or EVIL, then this Bishop acted correctly and with speed. But then to believe that, you have to believe that for centuries the Indefectable Bride of Christ taught evil. Can it be?

[narses]

"Where are you defending it from?"

Pedophiles, sodomites, heretics and the like. You know, like those who would claim that the SACRED LITURGY of the Church is anti-Semitic or those who would promote NAMBLA or those who would desecrate the Altar of God by allowing heretical services on them. You know.

[narses]

[ninenot]

Fiorenza is a suspect of the first water--a committed liberal with a capital L.

That said, I think Fr. overstepped his bounds by a WIDE margin--I would be sympathetic if he offered only 1 Old Rite Mass, leaving the other two as NO's.

That would have been more defensible, albeit still a bit pushy.

[ninenot]

Not only does Bp. Bruskewitz allow the Old Rite--he also allowed the SSPV to build their new seminary in his Diocese.

But--interestingly--because Lincoln was a 'straight' Diocese beforehand, and there was no gitchee-goommeee Mass, no bozos, no babes, no Coke w/Twinkies--there is little demand for the Old Rite at all.

[ultima ratio]

Note: the Novus Ordo has been consistently affirmed by two popes--though it violates Trent. This is what gives cover to these liturgical Nazis.

[ninenot]

as well as the Msgr Rossi who contacted his father.

THIS little detail may leave the Diocese exposed to a large lawsuit. It is no longer legal to discuss the 'health' of an employee with ANYONE under the Medical Privacy Act/2002.

Hope Fr. Zig has a sharp civil attorney.

[ultima ratio]

Note what raises this bishop's hackles, though. Had Fr. Z raped a six year old, he would still be in good standing. Bishop Ryan of Springfield, IL slept with adolescent boys. He was forced to resign in disgrace. Now he's being rehabilitated by Cardinal George and was asked to co-consecrate a new bishop recently. Had he been a traditionalist who said the old Mass, rather than a pederast on the prowl for minors, he would have been considered beyond the pale. This is NOT just a new rite these men are defending--it is a new religion.

[ultima ratio]

What do you mean he has "allowed the SSPV" to build a new seminary there? SSPV needs no such permission from any Novus Ordo bishop. I believe you are referring to FSSP--the traditionalist indult fraternity recently much abused by Rome. (So much for Rome's sympathy towards Catholic tradition.)

[RobbyS]

One thing you have got very wrong: whatever Cranmer did, it was not done gradually. The reforms were so precipitant that they led to the Pilgrimage of Grace.

[ultima ratio]

"An important innovation was the imposition of Communion under both kinds for the laity at the end of 1547. Catholics in England made the mistake of conceding this change without opposition for the sake of peace. The great Catholic historian Cardinal Francis Gasquet writes:

"It was, after all, only a matter of ecclesiastical discipline, although some innovators in urging the incompleteness of the Sacrament, when administered under one kind, gave a doctrinal turn to the question which issued in heresy. The great advantage secured to the innovators by the adoption of Communion under both kinds in England was the opportunity it afforded them of effecting a break with the ancient missal.16

"Every such break with tradition lessened the impact of those to follow, so that when changes that were not simply matters of discipline were introduced the possibility of effective resistance was considerably lessened. The introduction of the vernacular was the most significant innovation. Where the ordinary Catholic was concerned the celebration of parts or all of the traditional Mass in English was far more startling than the imposition of the newly composed vernacular Communion service in 1549. Douglas Harrison, the Anglican Dean of Bristol, accepts that by introducing English into the liturgy, 'Cranmer clearly was preparing for the day when liturgical revision would become possible.' In his Liturgical Institutions, Dom Prosper Guéranger writes: 'We must admit that it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever prevail, it would be well on its way to victory.'

"Exactly the same process was initiated following the Second Vatican Council. There is not the least doubt that the changes imposed upon the traditional Mass before 1969 were far more startling than the introduction of the Novus Ordo in 1969. By the time it came into use the faithful had already reached the stage of either accepting any innovation without question or joining the mass exodus from our churches that has continued to this day and shows no sign of abating. The 1965 Missal can be compared to Cranmer’s 1549 Communion Service or Mass, which was only an interim measure, intended to condition the faithful into accepting its 1552 replacement which could be interpreted only as a Protestant Communion service. Likewise, the 1965 Missal was intended to condition the faithful into accepting without protest the radically reformed Missal of 1969. In comparing the 1965 Missal to the 1549 Communion service in no way do I intend to suggest that the former is ambiguous, unorthodox, or comparable in any way to the 1549 Communion Service. It is totally orthodox and unambiguously sacrificial, retains the sublime offertory prayers, the Roman Canon, and such prayers as the Placeat tibi, all of which were abolished by the Protestant Reformers and would be abolished in the 1969 rite. Thanks be to God, Pope Paul VI ordered Msgr. Bugnini to replace the Roman Canon which he had removed from the 1969 rite of Mass. It is, alas, only an option and is very rarely used. My comparison does no more than suggest that just as the 1549 prayer book conditioned the faithful to accept without protest that of 1552, the 1965 Missal conditioned the vast majority of the faithful into accepting without protest that of 1969." (Michael Davies, Latin Mass Magazine, "In Support of Traditional Roman Catholicism," Spring, 2001.)

You need to read Michael Davies' masterful work, Cranmer's Godly Order. Davies explains the changes produced very little reaction at first by the faithful--just as today only a remnant are shocked and outraged. The above is what he said in an article in Latin Mass Magazine two years ago.

[cpforlife.org]

I read recently that the Novus Ordo was composed by six Protestant clergymen and two Catholic clergymen. Do any of you have info that supports or contradicts this?

[ultima ratio]

There were six Protestant ministers who were appointed as consultants and who had important input on every draft of the text. The finished product closely aligns with the Lutheran Lord's Supper liturgy and severely suppresses Catholic belief. The Committee was led by a well-known humanist--some say freemason--Msgr. Anabile Bugnini. After the innovation of the New Mass there was a precipitous drop in Mass attendance worldwide. It fell within a few years from 80%+ to around 24%. It is now around 17% and falling.

[Cicero]

The pastor behaved foolishly and disobediently, although I sympathize with his desire to use the Tridentine Mass.

What gets my goat, however, is that if a liberal priest breaks 79 rules and sleeps with the altar boys, the bishop looks the other way, but if a conservative priest gets uppity, he lowers the boom on him. There's no one more tyrannical than a powerdrunk liberal.

[B Knotts]

Fiorenza should have allowed a Tridentine Indult Mass, and Fr. Fig should have left the regular Sunday Novus Ordo lineup alone.

I agree. They both did the wrong thing.

[B Knotts]

I think that ultimately, there is really only one way to solve this: a new rite should be recognized: the Tridentine Rite, which could work like the Eastern Rite churches that we have which are in communion with the Pope.

[Desdemona]

BTW, I am one of the few who is going to support what he did. I think it was an act of part desperation, part presenting the truth to the laity.

I'm going to agree with you, if for no other reason than the bishop is making an idiot of himself and causing more questions to be asked of the chancery. The whole idea of having someone committed over this sort of incident is beyond reprehensible.

It might have been a Luther-esque move, but in the Catholic direction. The orginal protestant movement was 200 years old before Luther brought it above ground. It could be we're seeing the same sort of thing with traditional Catholicism - more and more people want it and all it's richness. The priest is one soldier in the war.

What bothered me about the congregation is that they complained because they couldn't have their way, at least the "ministers". Since when is it a Catholic posture to act like a spoiled brat?

[cpforlife.org]

"precipitous drop in Mass attendance worldwide"

The tree is known by it's fruit, yes?