Pope Francis appointed Archbishop Arthur Roche as the new prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, replacing Cardinal Robert Sarah and potentially ushering in a new era of active opposition to the Extraordinary Form of the Mass….
Archbishop Roche, formerly bishop of Leeds, U.K., served as Secretary of the Congregation from 2012 through this year, having been appointed to it by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI….
The appointment of Roche comes in light of fears that Pope Francis is about to restrict the celebration of the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite (also referred to as the Traditional Latin Mass, or the Tridentine Mass). Reports have emerged in recent days stating that Francis has spoken to the Italian Bishops Conference, telling them that he has finished the third draft of a document that will restrict the offering of the Extraordinary Form.
Vatican journalist Diane Montagna announced today that Messa in Latino, the original source of the news, had confirmed to her that the information was trustworthy and had come to them from three bishops and two high ranking members of the Roman Curia, who were all present at the event….
Following Pope Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum, which gave priests permission to offer the traditional Mass without seeking permission from their bishop, Roche swiftly declared that the power of the bishops to prevent the Latin Mass was still in effect, and issued guidelines on the matter.
In 2020, he penned a letter to the bishops of the world attacking the traditional Mass and praising the Second Vatican Council’s paradigm shift in its view of the Church, hailing the fact that the Council had removed the notion of the Church as a “perfect society and a world power to be contended with,” and instead was viewed as “constantly open to reform and conversion….”
The above comes from a May 27 story on LifeSiteNews
A different view from a May 28 story in The Pillar:
The nomination was met with a chorus of takes suggesting, variously, that Roche, 71, is about to usher in a new era of progressive liturgical reform, or that he is clearly a place-holder, destined to serve a single term before the newly named secretary of the congregation, Bishop Viola, takes over and, well, ushers in a new era of progressive liturgical reform.
As you can imagine, I think both of those takes are likely just wishcasting by the people making them. I also think that suggesting an 84-year-old pope is choosing department heads with an eye to what he’ll do when he’s 89 is just plain cracked.
Pope Francis has decidedly shunned the liturgy wars which obsess some sections of the Church, and I think his choice of a man known for getting along and getting on with things is probably more about avoiding a big fight at the end of his pontificate than starting one.
Regardless, the Novus Ordo Missae is the preferred Mass in the Roman Rite. It is the ordinary form of the Roman Rite: the usual, expected, normal form. You people harp on extraordinary ministers of holy Communion being unnecessary and pointless, well the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite should be similarly rare and exceptional as you want EMHCs to be.
If it was even close to being a fair comparison, this wouldn’t even be an argument. But if it were up to you and me, I’d say fine. Make it proportional. EM’s first….there’d be not much change at all on the TLM side and a seismic shift on the EM side….
No surprise here, Francis has long wanted to do away with “our beloved Pope Benedicts” Moto Propio Summorum Pontificum. The Modernists can never kill The Traditional Latin Mass, they are afraid of it and the power it holds for salvation.
It’s a “motu proprio” not a “moto proprio”. You’d think someone who prides himself on the Latin Mass would have better Latin knowledge and skills. “Motus” is a fourth declension noun; “proprius” a second declension adjective. In the ablative case, the endings are “u” and “o”, respectively.
I, a Novus Ordo Missae proponent, probably know and revere Latin in the Church more than most trads. It’s just a dress-up role-playing game for many of you: dress up and pretend it’s the “good old days” in the church; hide from developments you don’t like. Those days don’t exist anymore.
The TLM is no more valid nor salvifically potent than the new Mass.
@ Anonymous 2:58 pm. I wonder how you would describe faithful Catholics like myself who don’t attend the TLM or revere role-playing or dress-ups, but who are in a state of flux because of the eminently unsuitable, uninspired and un-catechetical leadership of the Catholic Church?
The leadership of the Catholic Church is the Holy Spirit. Stop looking at the humans.
@ Anonymous 1:17 a.m. – It’s hard to see the Church for the bishops.
Look at Jesus on the Cross. Meditate on Him. There are always challenges in the Church. Stay close to our Lady by praying the rosary and the Litany of Loreto. Pray to Mary, Help of Christians.
Looks like All Are Not Welcome. Kicking faithful Catholics who actually love the Church, to the curb, is spiteful and petty.
You’re welcome to have your museum Masses, if you want. Nobody will kick you to the curb, but a clarification that the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite is not to be generally preferred to the ordinary form is probably advisable for the health of the church. So maybe limit parishes to celebrating one or two TLMs per Sunday; other Masses must be the new Mass, but could be in Latin instead of the vernacular. That would be a reasonable and good edict, in my opinion.
Trads are dividing the church, and their inordinate attachment to the TLM such that they despise the new Mass is one cause of their divisive attitude. The pope should codify that the new Mass is to be the normal celebration of Mass at all parishes, with TLM a minor option if celebrated at all, and that will settle that.
You have an inferiority problem because you know the TLM, the Mass of the Ages, is better. In every way. Better.
You think so. The Church does not think so and teaches not. If you don’t accept what the Church teaches about the reformed liturgy, what makes you Catholic, exactly? You want to shut yourself up in a 1950s time capsule preconciliar Catholicism and pretend the rest of the world doesn’t exist or that history hasn’t moved on or that Vatican II never happened. Well you know what? The rest of the world is there and needs to be evangelized, and a time capsule liturgy won’t do it today.
Regarding what the Church teaches, does Vatican II recommend Mass in Latin or the vernacular?
Both. Vatican II explicitly says the Latin language is to be retained while encouraging greater use of the vernacular. But it clearly says the liturgy was to be reformed/revised, which means the preconciliar TLM was not to be the normal liturgical celebration anymore.
Yes, I concur with your comments, and it demonstrates that the New Mass doesn’t comply well with Vatican II: It’s not what the Council Fathers envisioned. The Council also had issues, of course, with the TLM.
I support the TLM because it’s necessary for many Catholics to grow and mature in Christ. The TLM offers excellent hymns and homilies. The New Mass, in practice, typically fails in this regard. Sadly, I’m finding it more and more difficult to find a place to worship outside of the TLM.
I think the New Mass needs to be revamped.
Well you wont being doing it. Your too busy welcoming LGBT with your rainbow banners.
Anonymous, don’t waste your time. True Catholics love and cherish their fine religious heritage of 2000+ years, and proudly and intelligently desire to protect and preserve it. The Modern era is extremely ignorant, barbaric, immoral, and unChristian, and rejects God, the Bible, Sacred Tradition, Christian Morality, and rejects Jesus Christ and all of His teachings. In a better, more truly religious era, better decisions will be made– and the Catholic Church will be proud of her heritage, not ignorantly ready to take a hatchet to it. This ignorant, brutal desire to “cancel the past,” has been going on in every field, and is a current “fashion of the day.” “Cancel Shakespeare,” or “cancel true American history” in the schools, “cancel George Washington and Abraham Lincoln”– or “cancel true Man/Woman Marriage,” or “cancel the true, biological concept of Man and Woman,” or “cancel European /Caucasian-centered Western Civilization”– or whatever.
Modernism and “political correctness” have invaded the universities and schools, and all fields of endeavor, for decades. You won’t believe what people will blindly “accept,” and sell their souls to the Devil for– out of laziness, fear, conformity and convenience. “Political correctness” and conformity to insane, immoral beliefs and concepts– is easily accepted, by ignorant, shallow people. It also makes their lives easier, to follow the “Zeitgeist” of the age– whatever is in style– and not think too deeply, not have any true convictions, not stand proudly for what is truly right and responsible. It is easier for such people to dump God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Bible, and Christianity, and go along with sick, anti-Christian, immoral misfits who get into positions of power, and demand that you believe in and accept whatever they want.
We will remain even if we have to go the catacombs we will reemerge after the modernist have finished destroying the Church.
Exactly the sort of schismatic, defiant, angry, divisive, reactionary, bunker-mentality, uncharitable, undocile, arrogant, corrosive attitude that is typical of so many trads. This is what Pope Francis wants to root out of the church, and if curtailing the TLM will accomplish that by preventing trads from isolating themselves in liturgical museums that fester division in the Church, then let it be done. Catholic in name only can apply to more than just libs. If you don’t accept the judgment of Holy Mother Church regarding liturgy, then you are just as much a CINO as the left-wing politicians you despise. Truth.
It is interesting to note that the comments by the advocates of reversing the Summorum Pontificum do not reflect Godliness in any way. They are petty, spiteful and accusatory, something that has prevailed in the sentiments of Modernists at least since the days of Vatican I. The growth of the TLM has already proceeded far beyond the capability of the Grinches of the Novus Ordo high clergy to shut down. The last laugh is that of Benedict and not “Anonymous”, who reminds us of how unpleasant the sound of pigs going to slaughter in the meat packing factory.
Wow Kaboom! You nailed it.
From my cold dead hand.
There are two different types of Trids in the World: Catholic and schismatic.
Regarding schismatic Trids, I largely agree with you [although I think you overstated the case]. Regarding Catholic Trids, I strongly disagree.
If a Catholic Trid wishes to be angry, defiant, and schismatic, it’s not too difficult for him to go into schism and become a member of SSPX.
Ask the Catholic trads you know who they think is pope. See what they tell you. Ask them if they think Francis or Benedict is pope. You’ll probably learn a lot about their mindset. Then much will become clear about why they think the way they do.
I’ve seen the word Trad before, but I’m not entirely certain what it is; therefore, I’ll use the word Trid.
The few Trids that I personally know don’t have a problem acknowledging Francis as the Pope. Of course, many orthodox Catholic’s have a problem with this Pope because he seems to be playing political games with doctrine (e.g. a wolf).
With that said, I, myself, as a non-Trid have always had a question in my mind about whether Benedict could have resigned. As I recall, I think the Code of Canon Law provides for this and I think that a few popes in the past may have resigned.
But I remember reading in my church history book that this question came up during the Great Western Schism. The solution to the schism was to get all the papal claimants to resign, but the Church did not name a new Pope until all the claimants had died. The reason was because no one knew if the Pope could actually resign.
Man, you just can’t make this stuff up.
There are such people as TLM Protestants, apparently.
No that applies only to liberals
“The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but men of tradition.” – Pope St. Pius X
The Holy Mass in Latin and Ad Orientem nourished the faithful for century after century. Men and women were inspired and strengthened by the Mass of All Time to give their lives to Christ and His Church and many to imitate Our Lord and lay down their lives for His sake. This being Memorial Day weekend, Fr. Emil Kapaun comes to mind. He said Holy Mass in Latin and gave many soldiers the courage to face death and hardship during the Korean War. The Ancient Rite was codified by Pope St. Gregory the Great in AD 600. It is a vital part of our heritage as Catholics and we should honor and cherish it. Far from being a “Museum Mass”, the Usus Antiquior is indeed timeless, as giving Our Lord the very best worship man can offer should be every Catholic’s focus and desire.
The TLM served its purpose during its time. The new Mass didn’t throw away Tradition. The new Mass overlaps with the old Mass and is in continuity with it. Holy Mother Church declared that the liturgy should be reformed. Unless you want to say that Vatican II was illegitimate or taught error regarding reforming the liturgy, you cannot say that the TLM is the only best worship the Church can or should offer.
The new Mass overlaps with the old Mass and is in continuity with it. Complete Modernist Lie
I find it a bit silly the continuous debate about the superiority of one Mass over the other. As long as the ‘rules’ are met, both are equally valid. If one prefers TLM, then so be it. I speak intermediate Spanish, so I attend Spanish Masses sometimes. Otherwise it’s plain old North American ‘English’. Just don’t force one Mass on people to the exclusion of others.
The “New Mass” is cold and lifeless. It’s one reason many no longer go to church.
Reading this site’s comments, I have come to suspect that quite a large number Catholics who post here hate Vatican II. Why is that?
Well as I always say here, you can have your “man made” Novus Ordo service, with dancing girls, altar girls, lay lectors, drums, guitars, pianos, rock, folk, mariachi music, hand holding, kiss of peace, communion in the hand while standing, improper attire, felt banners, clown Masses. Let us have the Mass of All Times with Latin, Gregorian chant, altar boys, kneeling and receiving on the tongue for Holy Communion, silence, incense, bells, Mozart, Hayden, Palestrina, stunning vestments, proper attire, you want to compare the TLM to the 50 year old Novus Ordo? Hopefully I passed your spelling test this time. Just remember the TLM is 1,500 years old, your “man made” Novus Ordo is roughly 50 and it is a sad sad thing.
The Novus Ordo Missae was quickly written up by a crew of six Protestant clergy, for strictly ecumenical purposes– under the direction of Abp. Annibale Bugnini, who stated that everything must be stripped from the Catholic liturgy that is a stumbling block to Protestants. (from “L’Osservatore Romano,” March 19, 1965) Bugnini’s new liturgy was very controversial. Professor Dietrich von Hildebrand was deeply shocked, and he remarked: “Truly, if one of the devils in C.S. Lewis’ “The Screwtape Letters” had been entrusted with the ruin of the liturgy, he could not have done it better.”
No it was not written by six Protestant clergy.
Yes, the New Mass was written up by six Protestant clergy under the direction of Abp. Bugnini. That is a historical fact.
It is not an historical fact. It is a lie told by schismatics. Pay better attention to the websites you are on. If you read it in a book or article, pitch it.
Anonymous, you are obviously uneducated and have nothing to work with. Did you know that Protestant clergy also were invited to “observe” at the First Ecumernical Council, of 1869-70??
Several of those six Protestant ministers at Vatican II, who helped craft the text of the New Mass, eventually converted to the Catholic Faith. The liturgical movement that resulted in the New Mass, actually began many decades before the Second Vatican Council.
One excellent source, easy to read and understand, where you can find lots of information on the New Mass– is in the books of the outstanding British traditional Catholic author, Michael Davies (now deceased).
Anonymous…with your clear intelligence and professed love of Latin, I would suggest a renewed inquiry into the sacred and profane in liturgical practice (Latin, by the way, is in no way the essential element in these matters). Martin Mosebach’s Heresy of Formlessness is an excellent set of reflections on the living reasons for and meanings of elements of traditional liturgy that you dismiss as museum pieces.
Romulus Augustus: you summed it up perfectly. Thank you.
People learn in different ways and people perceive in different ways so there will never be 100% agreement.
There are always extremists – Those that oppose the Pope are not true traditionalists.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is Calvary.
The TLM has a sacred and reverent Offertory, Consecration, and Communion which closely commemorates the sacrifice. of Jesus.
The TLM is the Mass of all the great saints and Doctors of the Church; St Thomas Aquinas, St Teresa, St John of the Cross,
St Bernard, St Francis, St Dominic, St Catherine of Sienna, St Therese, etc
Even most saints that are being canonized these days, also. attended the TLM.
It is “the most beautiful thing this side of heaven”
It seems that Priests who oppose the TLM, have no problems with Charismatic Masses or other Masses that promote Acting out and take the focus away from the Calvary Sacrifice. Why is that ?
No one is forcing anyone to attend the TLM – so why all the opposition ?
Satan hates the TLM because it is Calvary. and is seeding this opposition.
I hope the traditional orders, Fathers, Nuns won’t be hampered by Archbishop Arthur Roche and the Congregation for Divine Worship.
Wrong. The TLM was a post Trent invention meant to unify the western Church which up until then, especially in France, had a multitude of masses.
The Mass before Trent was similar to the Trident Mass. There had been slow, organic change over time not a replacement or “invention”
Trent standardized and eliminated all the liturgies that were less than 200 years old,
except for a few rites, e.g. Dominican, Carmelite, etc.
“We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it …with a fabrication…”
-Ratzinger’s Introduction to Monsignor Klaus Gambler’s The Reform of the Roman Liturgy
As Msgr Klaus Gamber wrote, , the liturgy was essentially the same from 600 AD (from Popes Damasus I and St Gregory the Great) to the 1960’s
See: https://archive.org/details/massstudyofroman00fort by Fortescue, Adrian, 1874-1923
Newadvent also gives a summary as does Wikipedia
See comparison chart of 400 ad with 1000 Ad
Anonymous– you need more respect for the fine heritage of your Church. Take pride in your Church and present it with great pride to your friends and family. When you marry and have children some day, you and your spouse should bring up your children with pride in the holy Catholic Faith and its Sacred Tradition! And be sure to proudly present to your children, the entire 2000 years of the sacred history of our Church– not just the past 50 new, “experimental” post-Conciliar years. And especially, you and your spouse must proudly present the great beauty and holiness of the old Latin Mass, as a very valuable treasure! Unlike you, your children may be drawn to desire the old Latin Mass, as many young people are, today. You should be thrilled to pieces– and encourage them to go. Give up your useless prejudice– it is unworthy of a devout Catholic and follower of Christ.
Anonymous, Archbishop Roche is age 71, and will be required to submit his resignation in only four brief years!
Hopefully God will call him to judgement before that
Pope Francis does not admire laymen and clergy who are deeply dedicated to our Church, very responsible, very devout and mature– and especially, he detests those who are very orthodox and traditional, and love the old Latin Mass! He considers such people as “too rigid.” He especially chides “rigid” faithful, dedicated, orthodox Catholic seminarians– and has a fit, because so many of them want to learn to say the beautiful, old Latin Mass! Pope Francis, at almost age 85, loves everything to be “loose and free,” with not much seriousness or commitment. He doesn’t care much if the President of Argentina is separated from his wife and living with a mistress, and eagerly legalized Abortion last year — the Pope and his top clergy will say Mass for the sinful couple, and give them Holy Communion, in the Vatican! Nor does the Pope care if U.S. President Joe Biden and Rep. Nancy Pelosi take Communion as phony “Catholics,” and promote Abortion. The Pope and his top clerics really want to abolish those “rigid Church rules” as much as they can! And sadly– they are very likely to embarrass Pope Benedict, and deviantly figure out a way to get rid of his “Summorum Pontificum!” The Pope and his top clerics have had that in mind for a long-time! So sad!
I have never understood the point of the radicalism of the Novus Ordo, particularly as implemented. I attend a Lutheran church which is far more Catholic in its liturgy, particularly communion, than the Catholic church today. But the most disturbing thing to me (a Protestant who faithfully reared three Catholic children at Stanford’s St. Anne’s, where the Novos Ordo was followed, but enhanced with some Latin and sung Renaissance polyphony), is the self-destructive fanaticism with which Bugnini’s reforms were imposed, at least initially. Far from growing the church by gathering in Protestants, it split the Catholic church and made it smaller, meaner and more dreary. Much of the ritual which was eliminated not only expressed valid and important theology, but also sound psychology.
Nearly sixty years later, much of the legacy of these reforms is still, sadly, both divisive and utterly unecessary. It would have been perfectly possible to renew the liturgy–and the church– in positive ways without such a radical, heartless and self-defeating implementation. All that was needed was a spirit of both/and rather than either/or.
Very nicely said.
Yes, very beautifully said.
Um. where are the mean novus ordo Catholics? My experience is that novus ordos are welcoming of everyone.
Lutheran Communion isn’t real. It’s fake. If you want real Communion you should go to a TLM.
No, Anonymous. Lutheran Communion services are not “fake.” They do not believe in the Catholic priesthood, nor Transubstantiation. And their type of Communion means something entirely different to them. They are not offering any kind of “fake” Sacrament. It is highly important to respect people of different beliefs.
If they don’t have real priests, then the bread and wine aren’t consecrated. It’s just a symbol. It’s not real Communion. I’m amazed that people here criticize Communion at the new Mass while defending fake communion and saying we should respect other religious beliefs.
In many cases things were brought into the new mass from other denominations and secular organizations. The holding of hands during the Lord’s prayer was bought in from the Twelve Step programs and was not part of the mass and not in the GIRM (General Instructions of the Roman Missal). I knew one priest who told his parishioners he was in Alcoholics Anonymous who started forcing people to hold hands at the Lord’s Prayer. That was not right. Many of us left his church and went to one that followed the GIRM.
Anonymous, use your brain, please! When you go to a Protestant service, their Communion is not “fake.” Stop your blindness! Do not compare apples and oranges! They do not believe in Catholic doctrines! Their Communion is a “remembrance” of Christ’s Last Supper. It is not at all sacramental. It’s funny– but all the Protestants say that our Catholic Eucharist is a “fake,” too! They do not believe in priests and Sacraments– that is “pagan” and ridiculous, to the Protestants. They simply do not understand us.
Anon, perhaps you should do a little more research. I know many Lutherans and Lutheran Pastors. Lutherans believe that the host and wine are the body and blood of Christ. Their consecration liturgy is almost word for word that of the Catholic Church. When they go to communion they believe they are receiving the body and blood and believe in the true presence of Christ. Their communion is not play-acting. When they take communion to shut-ins or to the hospital, a layperson takes bread and wine that has been consecrated at church. If a Pastor takes them communion, he consecrates the species on site.
Bob One, I had always thought that Martin Luther rejected the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation, believing in “consubstantiation,” instead– he said that the bread and wine are still present– along with Christ’s Body and Blood– in Holy Communion. Lutheran theologians call it the “sacramental union.” Protestant denominations that are similar to the Catholic Church,
do not mainly focus on the Eucharist in their liturgies, and do not have Eucharistic services every Sunday, and not very frequently on weekdays— their practices are different. I thought also, that there was no link to the ancient lineage of Apostolic Succession with Lutheran clergy, as with Anglican clergy. From where, then, is the Apostolic transmission of grace, at a Lutheran Ordination, for their clergy to validly consecrate the bread and wine, etc.?? What do their theologians believe?? I really have no idea! Maybe you can explain more about this, and the Catholic-Lutheran controversy in Germany, regarding reception of Holy Communion, in both churches, by mixed Lutheran-Catholic couples. I know that the Catholic Church teaches that it is okay for a priest to give a Protestant Holy Communion, if they request it, and are in danger of death.
Don’t go by loudmouths on the Internet.
The reforms are not divisive.
What many people do not realize, is the fact that the old Latin Mass is an authentic, Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, completely and totally theologically correct in liturgical form. And the 1570 Tridentine Mass, from the Council of Trent, was a form of the Mass handed down 100% correctly, in liturgical and theological form– with only a few minor, unimportant variances– from the day of the very first Mass! The Catholic Mass of the early 1500s of King Henry VIII and St. Thomas More, was very similar to the later Tridentine Mass of 1570! By contrast– the Novus Ordo Missae of 1969, is not a traditional form of the Catholic Mass, liturgically and theologically– it is experimental, for the purposes of Ecumenism– it has little resemblance to the 1570 Latin Tridentine Mass, and does not correctly adhere to the authentic liturgical form of the Holy Sacrifice, the key to Christ’s Salvific, Redemptive work for us, on the Cross! The New Mass liturgy was quickly drawn up in a very brief time, by six Protestant ministers under the direction of Abp. Annibale Bugnini, to suit the ecumenical purposes of the Council. The Council Fathers deliberately abandoned the traditional Catholic liturgical form, to help in the ecumenical effort, of Christian unity. The New Mass is still sacramentally valid, as the Consecration uses the exact formula. However, if a liberal priest ever goofs around, up on the altar, with the formula for Transubstantiation– the Sacrament will not be validly done, and will be — useless! This has actually happenned, with other post-Conciliar Sacraments! Many Catholics, even priests, who were recently born, baptized and confirmed with “experimental” formulae after the Council, have been warned by the Vatican, that they have to correctly redo their Sacraments! Even priests that this has happenned to, all have had to completely re-do all of their Sacraments– including Ordination! Holy Orders can only be conferred upon a correctly baptized Catholic man!
You are getting your information from a bad source. The Mass was not made by Protestant ministers. This is some of the hokum from traditionalist (as in dissident or schismatic) websites. I remember when I first ran into that stuff. They show a picture of the six Protestant ministers with the Pope and claim they wrote the Mass. Some even have the names of the ministers. See- proof. No it is a picture of the Pope with the Protestant observers at Vatican II. The Mass was not changed at Vatican II. The Council Fathers did not abandon traditional Catholic liturgical form.
There really are not priests “goofing” around and not doing the Consecration correctly.
There have been some people who were baptized according to an incorrect formula. The diocese where this happened has worked to find those people and get them properly baptized. And other sacraments if necessary. It is done very quickly. This is a source of grief to all of us.
Yes, Anonymous, there have been many liberal priests in the post-Conciliar era who have concocted “experimental liturgies,” with incorrect Consecrations, and their bishops usually have caught them and ended it. I once attended such an “experimental Mass” in the early 1970s by accident– after work– and this liberal priest, after doing a “creative, ad-libbed” version of the Canon of the Mass, got quietly stopped by another priest, who went up and whispered in the liberal priest’s ear, and gave him the proper Eucharistic Prayer, and he announced that he had to re-do it. So, he re-did it correctly– and we all were so horrified, that this occurred! I signed a petition to the local Bishop, and the bishop got rid of this liberal priest. How many fake Masses did he say– with fake Communions? And possibly other fake, “creative” messed-up Sacraments?? Too bad. Also, many fake baptisms have taken place since Vatican II, with incorrect “creative” formulae. I have seen this myself! And no– you are certainly not educated enough nor have the background to understand what happenned with Vatican II, nor with the creation of the new liturgy, and all that occurred. Stop pretending to be a big “know-it-all!”
God bless you.
Anon., the early 1970s was half a century ago. I believe that liturgical abuse has been addressed.
I think Pope John Paul II was educated enough and had the background to understand what happened with Vatican II, as did Pope Benedict XVI.
I don’t know it all at all.
This article has generated a lot of heat and not much light. The article is pure speculation. It is not yet clear that Roche will make any of the purported changes. Let us pray for him in his new role and see what happens.
Remember back when Catholics understood “Thy Will be Done?”
Remember back when Catholics understood that nothing of the senses mattered, it was a distraction from holiness?
Remember Back when Catholics understood that arguing was a sin of the tongue?
No, Anonymous. Arguing, debating, is not a “sin of the tongue.” For centuries, debates on matters of the Faith have been an essential part of Catholic university training. And Catholic clergy have argued and debated with Protestants, Muslims, and many others, defending the Faith, and seeking conversions.
OK. Quarrelling is a sin of the tongue.
Being cruel to your fellowman, with malicious intent, is the sin, Anonymous. And St. Paul famously warns us, in Ephesians 4:26, that we “must not let the sun go down on our anger.” I used to hear married couples quote that, as a child. We must all remove unjust anger, hatred, cruelty, bad feelings towards others, and revenge from our hearts, and forgive others. We want Christ to live in our hearts, not the Devil, who loves malicious anger, and all evils But there is also “just anger,” as when Jesus, in God’s Justice, threw the evil money changers out of the temple. This was not a personal, vengeful, hateful act, full of malicious intent. It was God’s Justice– which is the right use of anger, a God-given part of our human nature.
You are correct in what you wrote but see also
Titus 3: 9-11
2 Timothy 2:14
Very good Scriptural quotes, Anonymous– appropriate for some of the troubled, pugnacious posters here, don’t you think?
Now, we need to confront “bad Catholics” promoting Abortion– and debate them, and seek to convert them to Pro-Life! Especially, Pres. Biden, Xavier Becerra, and Rep. Pelosi!
At one time the TLM was only 50 years old. The hatred-laced acrimony has got to stop. The Catholic Church has 23 various Rites, each with its own version of the Mass. The Latin Rite has the Ordinary Form and the Extraordinary Form. The TLM is not the ordinary form anymore but is just as valid as the Ordinary Form. BOTH ARE EQUAL IN THE SIGHT OF GOD and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. Consider them the QAnon of the Catholic Church.
Guess what? The document that will restrict celebrating the TLM is in its third draft. It’s a foregone conclusion that Summorum Pontificum will be rolled back.
Allowing the TLM has divided the church because the trads think their old Mass is superior and despise their fellow new Mass Catholics as modernist heretics.
bohemond, you do everything in your power to scare people away from the Church when you make statements like this. “God is Love” is not a throwaway slogan. It is time that we all start listening to Him. Love others as God loves you. God does not hate. We should not hate our fellow humans for any reason.
Anonymous, charity, kindness, and sensitivity to others are true indications of an authentic Christian.
Faith, hope, charity, humility, kindness, docility, obedience, trust in God, chastity, long-suffering, etc…
So, Anonymous– if you wish to become a good, practicing Catholic, you had better get going and practice these Christian virtues.