Many Catholics over the past few decades have studiously avoided the “liturgy wars” within the Church and, frankly, I don’t blame them. Too often these battles involve a lot of heat and not a lot of light. Catholic against Catholic can become quite vicious and personal at times. Better to simply keep one’s head down, bear silently with any liturgical issues at your parish, and soldier on.
Because of this prevailing attitude, many Catholics have also only been somewhat if at all interested in Pope Francis’s efforts to restrict and ultimately eliminate the traditional Latin Mass. It doesn’t impact them directly, and it seems to concern issues above their pay grade. Again, better to keep one’s head down.
The problem is that the effort to shut down the traditional Latin Mass is only one prong in a multipronged war by the pope against the perceived threat of “traditionalism.” For whatever reason, Francis seems to believe that traditionalism is one of the most pressing problems in the Church today and needs to be vigorously resisted.
Now the average faithful Catholic might say, “But I’m not a traditionalist, I attend the Ordinary Form and I’m fine with Vatican II, so what’s it to me?” Recent remarks by the pope, however, shows that this attack on “traditionalism” in the Church goes far deeper than an attachment to the old rites—it directly impacts the doctrines of the Church.
Last week on the plane back from Canada (it’s always on a plane, isn’t it?), the pope was asked about efforts to undercut Humanae Vitae and change the Church’s absolute prohibition against artificial contraception. His answer was revealing. Instead of just simply saying that this teaching would not—because it could not—change, he launched into another diatribe against traditionalism:
But know that dogma, morality, is always on a path of development, but always developing in the same direction…I think this is very clear: a Church that does not develop its thinking in an ecclesial sense, is a Church that is going backward. This is today’s problem, and of many who call themselves traditional. No, no, they are not traditional, they are people looking to the past, going backward, without roots – it has always been done that way, that’s how it was done last century. And looking backward is a sin because it does not progress with the Church. Tradition, instead, someone said (I think I said it in one of the speeches), tradition is the living faith of those who have died. Instead, for those people who are looking backward, who call themselves traditionalists, it is the dead faith of the living. Tradition is truly the root, the inspiration by which to go forward in the Church, and this is always vertical. And looking backward is going backward, it is always closed.
In other words, to think that the Church’s teaching about artificial contraception cannot “develop” is to be a “traditionalist” who has “the dead faith of the living” (and although there’s a lot of wordplay here, “develop” essentially means “change” in this context, since an absolute moral prohibition on artificial contraception can only be changed into something it is not). Humanae Vitae is simply “how it was done last century.”
So, in the pope’s eyes, you do not have to attend the traditional Latin Mass—you don’t even have to care a lick about the liturgy—to be a “traditionalist;” simply believing that the Church cannot change her fundamental moral teachings makes you one….
The above comes from an Aug. 2 posting by Eric Sammons in Crisis magazine.
Who’s looking backwards? Sheesh…all you have to do is look around and see there’s a huge problem and it isn’t that kids and adults are too reverent or too chaste
The TLM is an inadequate liturgy for the modern world and for modern Catholics. That’s why Vatican II ordered it to be reformed and replaced. It suited a pre-literate, clerical culture, not today’s world in which the laity are often more educated than priests.
Let me channel my inner Sam Spade here from The Maltese Falcon. You won’t understand this but I’ll try this one time…
I simply cannot attend NO Mass for the abuses large and small. From the Jesuit visiting priest telling us in the homily that many if not most of the old testament profits didn’t actually hear God but had mental illness. To the female EMHC who could not fold a corporal to save her life. And, week after week seeing her dump our lord on to carpet to be later vacuumed up and thrown in the trash. Yes. I did complain to the pastor on the abuse and he never trained the EMHC properly. None of that exists in the TLM. I’ve never seen nothing like that at the SSPX or an bishop approved latin mass group.
While the abuse of not folding a corporal correctly is one of my own moments of irritation, it’s not only EMHC people it’s sometimes a Deacon or a Priest. After having served as a Master of Ceremonies for Cardinals Levada and Mahony and as M.C. in the Seminary I am not a liturgical expert but I do know a thing or two about ceremonies and liturgy. But I’ve also seen things at a Tridentine Mass that have made me wonder what the Priest was thinking as he treated the people around him like they weren’t there, as well as people in the pews paying only enough attention to Mass to know when to make their way to the Communion rail. I’m old enough to have spoken to this group before Vatican II and many of them had no idea that Mary was not the Mother of God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, or that they were allowed to read the Sacred Scriptures for themselves. Now, don’t get me wrong. I know that the Church teaching on these things has been the same since antiquity, but some of the laity were certainly not aware of Church teaching and many used sacramentals as means to their goal of getting themselves to be good enough to get into Heaven quote on their own by making (not receiving) their First Holy Communion and Confirmation.
The problem isn’t just that N.O. folks are sometimes ignorant, there has been ignorance throughout the entire history of the Church. It’s not good, but usually it’s not a sin because it wasn’t done with intent, it was just a tradition that someone had started that wasn’t healthy or correct at all. Certainly I am not talking about all tradition, because there is Sacred Tradition, very good tradition (like singing beautiful music in Church when one can get Catholics to sing) and then there are traditions that are simply wrong, like the Jansenist tradition that lay people are not good enough to receive Holy Communion, only the clergy is holy enough for that.
I’ve been to both TLM and NO Masses where people were reverent, dignified and if there was a mistake it was handled gently and with understanding that we all make mistakes. I was once at Mass with a wonderful Bishop. He was about the elevate a crystal decanter of Sacred Chrism during his homily about Confirmation. The server who was going to hand it to him, a young man about age 15, was there holding it. We found out later that he’d been at a wrestling event only an hour before Mass and had been exhausted in the event. He felt woozy and nearly passed out standing there. He dropped the crystal decanter and nearly fell over. Both the Bishop and I rushed over and the Bishop asked for someone to bring a cold cloth and towels. I mopped the boys head with the wet, cool cloth and the Bishop began to clean up the Chrism, telling the boy: “I hope you are alright!” Then he turned to the people and said: “Can we get some help with the boy and can someone get more towels?” That Bishop handled the mistake with grace and compassion.
Mistakes will often happen. We should do our best to train people in correct ways of doing things and still love the people around us as Christ would.
The fault isn’t on one “side” or another. The fault is the willingness to act in a sinful manner in what we have done or in what we have failed to do.
If I could down vote you a million times I would. Poor excuse of well everyone does it illogic. This from a priest even.
This attitude just reminds me why I won’t go NO.
Clear lack of belief in the ReAl Presence. Shameful and embarrassing
Reply to dirty rat: False accusation and rash judgement are sins
Both you (thatdirtylittleratnunnheim) and Fr. John Higgins have made some very good points. I love the Traditional Latin Mass and think it impossible to get rid of 2000 years of Church history, but I also love reading the writings of the Church Fathers and Saints in the Liturgy of the Hours, even though there are occasional mistakes, and some, I said some, of the hymns in the latter are not so great.
God bless you both. Let us learn from each other.
Hmmm…interesting narrative. Even if that argument were true, it conflates illiteracy with low intelligence. That is demonstrably false so what we’re dealing with here is a kind of liturgical arrogance whereby Catholics who find spiritual fruit from the TLM are dumb and the ones that don’t are smart. Further, we’re dealing with a tremendous misunderstanding of the purpose of the Mass in the first place which is to fulfil the obligation, in justice, to the Creator, to offer worship in the sacrificial manner He commanded us. Not to scratch some itch for great preaching, scripture study or music that moves us, all of which are fine and are readily available outside of the Mass. Are the Eastern Rite Masses for dumb people too?
Neither the TLM nor the NO folks are dumb with the possible exception of the ones who are pointing their fingers at the other group and calling all of them “dumb”.
The modern world is Godless, devoid of faith in God, drenched in sin. Several Latin American prelates have said that the current pope lacks authentic Catholic faith, and is not very interested in the spiritual life at all, and does not understand it, he is very worldly. He just wants an easy job for himself, compatible with the world. And no battles with dissidents and unbelievers.
Well, we can always gossip about the Pope and join in with those who are devoid if faith and God and drenched in sin. That’s what happens when we simply talk about someone based on what several other people say about them.
Yes, there is gossip. But also, a Roman Catholic pontiff has no business publicly despising, ridiculing, and ordering the demise of 2,000 years of Roman Catholic Sacred Tradition. And he also has no business being publicly ambivalent on Catholic teachings of our Faith and Morals– he should be solid as a rock. And he has no business trying to destroy Catholicism– as founded by Christ— re-shaping the Catholic Church according to modern, highly secular, worldly, immoral, anti-Christian beliefs, interests, and trends– the shallow, worldly “zeitgeist” of the day. He has no respect for his own Elders, and their sacred traditions –a great Gift, a treasure of the ages, all the way back to Christ, and the Old Testament, before Him– entrusted and passed on to him, as the Pope.
And yes– the Pope has also done a lot of good in the world, too. He is nearly crippled, with hus knee ailment– yet, he traveled from the other side of the globe, to try to bring a Church apology, peace, love, reconciling, and consolation, to the injured Indians of Canada. May God bless the Pope for this!
Just like the Indians, we, too, are a part of a great and glorious culture — Western Civilization– plus, our beloved, treasured Gift of the Catholic Faith and Culture, our Catholic way of life in Christ, passed down to us by our ancestors! Our cultural and religious Identity is extremely important for us all! We cannot be told to senselessly throw it all away, for Godless Modernism, and live in a de-constructed, savage, immoral “Wasteland,” the Satanic Culture of Death!
Traditionalism is paganism of thought because traditionalists make a false god out of the past or the past’s ritual forms. They irrationally cling to the past, which they have made into an idol.
No, the Pope made many lovely speeches, telling the Indians to always look back to their beloved predecessors and sacred traditions, and to be sure to respect and value their elders, predecessors, and sacred traditions, as all of this is highly important! Yes! Listen to the Pope on that! He was right! I have believed this way, lifelong– in my own culture, and Catholic Faith, too! Listen to your elders, and predecessors, and look up to them and respect them! Respect and cherish all of your sacred Traditions, handed down to you– all of this is very, very important, and very precious! Yes! Of course! Now– Pope Francis, please apply that excellent reasoning to your own Church!
But allowing pagan idols on the altar is not a sin?
What pagan idols were on an altar?
Pachamama! The Pope’s PAGAN IDOLS in the Vatican! As the whole world knows! Plus, with the Indians of Canada, the Pope participated in a pagan Smudge Ceremony and Circle of (Pagan) Spirits, with many pagan songs and rituals.
Pachamama was not on an altar. There was a plant. Not Pachamama. Get it right.
No, not an altar! You had better get it right! On Oct. 4, 2019, the Pope attended an idolatrous service of worship of the Pachamama fertility goddess, in the Vatican Gardens. On Oct. 7, 2019, the Pachamama idol was placed in front of the main altar, in St. Peter’s Basilica, and then carried in a Procession to the Synod Hall. This was an event during the controversial Amazon Synod. Those are the facts.
Loved the video of Oct. 21, 2019, in which young Alexander Tschugguel, the Hero, who, along with an accomplice, took the five statues of the Pachamama idols on display at the Church of Santa Maria, and courageously hurled them into the Tiber River! Wow! That was absolutely spectacular!
I remember after the incident, that the pope was issuing an apology. I thought, “Good, he realized it was wrong to allow those pagan idols.” Then the apology came. He apologized because Alexander had the spiritual insight to get those pagan idols out of a holy place. Unbelievable!
They were not pagan idols. They were indigenous presentations of a Mary-like image
It was not Pachamama, it was Our Lady of the Amazon, although to our western eyes it looks bad.
The Pachamama goddess has nothing at all to do with Our Blessed Mother. The Pachamama idol is a fertility goddess of the Amazon region.
“It was not Pachamama, it was Our Lady of the Amazon,” Absolute BS…
I suggest everyone listen to Fr. Mitch Pacwa, S.J. on his You tube Video entitled “Fr. Mitch Pacwa on Pachamama Idol Worship — You Tube”. He worked in Peru and knows all about the Pachamama idol. He ends his video by telling people who say it is not an idol, “Stop it! We are stupid.”
He is one of the good Jesuits, and there are still some of those. He has written books against the occult from having been fooled by some of it when much younger.
Correction to fourth line: he said, “Stop it! We are not stupid.”
I keep having to tell myself, “You can’t leave Jesus because of Judas”.
Poor memory?
Click the blue word answers.
This edit misses the whole point.
Is it a sin to look back to Jesus and the apostles? So when does truth begin in this man’s mind?
Obviously no.
Truth is eternal. It has no beginning.
We probably shouldn’t be looking back to the 1930’s and 1940’s. It is an era that has given us people like Biden, Pelosi, etc.
Sorry, but the writer of this piece, Sammons, may have done a great disservice to his readers by mischaracterizing the words of Pope Francis in his plane interview. For example, the lengthy quote Sammons cites from Pope Francis was the Holy Father’s words soon after he referred to the Church’s teachings on the death penalty and on nuclear weapons. In other words, the Pope never said what Sammons is implying: that the Church’s teaching on contraception is “developing.” In fact it was the questioner who brought up the word “development”, and the Pope carefully told her that the Magisterium is there to put a stop to any “development” in the understanding of doctrine that does not proceed in an “ecclesial sense”. The Pope relied a lot on the words of the monk St. Vincent of Lérins. He said: “Then it is up to the Magisterium to say no, you’ve [the theologians have] gone too far, come back, but theological development must be open, that’s what theologians are for. And the Magisterium must help to understand the limits.” The Pope is actually expanding upon Cardinal Ratzinger’s point on the dialogue that must always happen between theologians who do research and expand our knowledge of the truth and the Magisterium whose task is to either say “yes” or “no” if theologians have gone too far. My take home point, people: Read the interview yourself and don’t rely on Sammon’s negative anti-Francis spin.
Then why doesn’t the Pope say “that is not what I said” and explain what he did say through an authentic translation if he can’t do it in English..
Why are you blaming the Pope? Blame the writer of this article. Blame those who’d rather believe anti-Francis articles, rather than actually reading what he said. People really..
“People, really.” Really, jon? Can’t you see the objective truth of all of this? Nobody has to lay blame on the Pope for anything. The Pope brings “blame” onto himself, all by himself– being ambiguous, and sometimes totally contradicting Catholic teachings and morality. And he never apologizes for this, and never corrects himself, and never changes. Always the same. He brings much criticism for his behavior, on himself.
The old name for the Devil is the Accuser, “Reply to.” He incites people such as yourself to falsely lay blame on people, on the Pope, on bishops, etc. Just listen to yourself, for example. The false accusation that the Pope has “contradicted” Catholic teaching. Go ahead and prove it.
Just spewing hatred for the Vicar of Christ at every comment. That’s wrong “Reply to”. You should be sorry for attacking the leaders of the Church in your comments.
I gave jon thumbs up for liking his posts. They were removed and now the thumbs don’t work.
If you can’t be honest, get rid of the thumbs.
This is a sin.
The Devil is a Trickster, clever and ambiguous– who twists lies and tries to make people believe that lies are the Truth.
jon, Nobody in this world is “just spewing hatred for the Vicar of Christ.” Everyone actually wants to love and revere the Pope. But this Pope so often does not support the Catholic Faith very well. And this Pope also does not call himself the “Vicar of Christ.” He rejects many of the traditions, and traditional terms, of our Catholic Faith. Unusual.
I have never understood why anyone would say that the Pope does not support the Catholic Faith very well.
I have to assume that they do not understand the Catholic Faith.
Additionally, if “Reply to” is not spewing hatred against the Pope, then why is she writing that the Pope rejects the traditions of the Church? The Pope isn’t rejecting Tradition. That is blatantly false. Pope Francis is actually standing up for and defining what authentic adherence to the Tradition means. For example, the Pope in this same interview is saying that authentic reverence for Tradition doesn’t mean looking back as if you’re preserving an archeological artifact or museum piece (which is how some Catholics have regarded the TLM). That’s wrong, people. Rather an authentically tradition-minded Catholic uses Tradition to move forward, uses the Church’s patrimony to speak to the people of today. Case in point: you will not be effective in speaking to the people of today about the Church’s rich Tradition if you keep thrashing the Pope, an activity of those who are not authentically traditional.
Have to assume– You sound like a dissident who favors ambiguity– and wants the Church to change her moral teachings. Cardinal Hollerich, who was designated as the relator general, in charge of the recent “Synod on Synodality,” believes the Catechism must change to allow for gay “marriage.” He just made a public statement, saying that “the pope agrees with him.”
Stating that bringing the True Faith to the indigenous people of Canada was genocide should give you a hint as to why…
I am not a dissident. I do not favor ambiguity. I do not want the Church to change her moral teachings. I do not support gay marriage.
I have googled it and I cannot find anything where Cardinal Hollerich wants the catechism to change to allow gay marriage.
I see a headline on LifeSiteNews but it is very misleading as is the article. He does not say that the Pope agrees with him. He said that he is in agreement with the Pope and also said that the teaching on sin is not being changed and then he says he is in agreement with the Pope (not mentioned in the article-the Pope has said gay marriage cannot be done).
Most of this article is someone else’s interpretation (highly biased) on what Cardinal Hollerich said.
You yourself are misrepresenting that.
You have the audacity to call me a dissident who favors ambiguity.
There is no ambiguity. No gay marriage. As often as the Church repeats it- there are always people who keep trying to stir up ignorant Catholics by crying wolf.
to the commenter “Do you favor ambiguity?”- This is definitely a sin against the 8th Commandment. And since the lies and implications are about leaders in the Church, it could even be sacrilege.
Jon I wish you would use a small t tradition when you make reference to the music, liturgy, devotions etc which are part of the Church’s patrimony and which can and have changed over time as needs and talents have changed and a large T Tradition when referencing the un-changeable deposit of faith handed down directly from the Apostles. I know you know the difference but many who opine here (especially many who state so dogmatically about things like the TLM and church architecture etc) do not and causes immense confusion in the comments section.
I say, why are you, “Your Fellow,” quibbling about the use of an uppercase “T” as opposed to the lowercase when you evidently should first correct your own egregious and malformed understanding of Catholic theology and morality as evidenced in these recent words of yours: “Our entire theology is still based on the notion that women are only a receptacle for male life giving energy. We all agree that is silly yet our systematic and moral theologies have not even begun to catch up.” I daresay, before quibbling about the use of the uppercase letter, do first correct and inform yourself on more urgent matters, such as the true richness and depth of Catholic theology and morality, rather than your propounding a childish caricature of them.
How many more filthy Catholic clerics in high positions does the Catholic Church have, just like Theodore McCarrick, and papal friend, convicted Argentine criminal clergy sex abuser, Gustavo Zanchetta? And thousands of other clergy pedophiles? Oh, how they all would just love to “change the Catechism” to allow for gay sex and gay marriage.
To: have to assume– Cardinal Hollerich is currently on a two-week American “Pastoral Visit to the Midwest,” where he is saying Mass and speaking in many Midwestern churches. He speaks and writes in good English. Many reporters and Catholic laymen have been asking Cdl. Hollerich about his views on changing the Catechism to accept Gay “Marriage.” His answers are scandalous.
The issue is not Cardinal Hollerich, That is a distraction.
But if you want to give sources for me to read about Cardinal Hollerich, I will read them.
The issue is not sinful clerics, either.
That too is a distraction from the current topic.
The issue is that people know the Faith so poorly that they accuse the Pope of not supporting the Faith.
Where did people learn their Catechism?
Read the Bible. Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Do everything you can to fill in the gaps in your knowledge and understanding.
You do not understand the commenter– no brains.
Hail Mary…The Lord understands.
To Catechism of Trent– You are extremely naive! Today’s Catholic Church has too many high-ranking immoral, heretical clerics, who believe in Gay Sex and Gay “Marriage”– and want to change the Catechism! Did you read the article, a few months ago, on this website, about Cdl. Hollerich? LifeSite News also has an easy-to-find interview with Cdl. Hollerich, during his Midwestern Pastoral Visit, in a Chicago church. Many other news outlets have the same thing– EWTN’s “National Catholic Register,” “Catholic News Agency,” “Crux,” and others.
EWTN’s “News Nightly” has also had interviews with Cdl. Hollerich. Try Google, type in “Interviews with Cardinal Hollerich “
I just went to Google and typed in: “Cardinal Hollerich– interviews on changing the Catechism.” Tons of stuff came up! This piwerful prelate should be excommunicated!
Why is this commenter (“Reply to”) not bringing up the Holy See’s correction of the Germans’ Synod? Why is “Reply to” so eager to perpetuate partial and thereby false information about the Church? The fact is that the Holy See corrected the Germans’ Synodal process very recently. Correcting them, thereby correcting folks like Cardinal Hollerich too. The Holy See said: “The ‘Synodal Way’ in Germany does not have the power to compel bishops and the faithful to adopt new forms of governance and new orientations of doctrine and morals….It would not be permissible to introduce new official structures or doctrines in dioceses before an agreement had been reached at the level of the universal Church, which would constitute a violation of ecclesial communion and a threat to the unity of the Church.”
Again, why is this commenter (“Reply to”) always spewing negativity unjustly against the Holy Roman Catholic Church?
Give any source and please link that says any high-ranking cleric believes in gay sex and gay marriage.
There are priests who do- and there have been some clerics who engage in gay sex.
But I have never seen any high ranking cleric say that.
There are websites who accuse them of it but when you actually read the articles or the interviews they do not really say that.
Germany bishops have not even done that.
are people equating “changing the catechism” with “changing the faith?”
Head in the sand, lying to yourself. Blindly worshipping the Evil One, the Father of Lies, attacking and destroying tthe church from within.
show me the link and jon– Both of you are dishonest. And jon will be first in line to get the next flawed papal document resulting from the dishonest “Synod on Synodality,” and “preach” it to everyone. Simply to be first. Not to be an honest Catholic.
Dear “Dishonest”—It is well-reported that the Holy See has recently corrected the Germans’ “Synodal Way.” This is well-reported. Look it up yourself. My point remains that people like “Reply to” and possibly yourself do nothing but spew (and I mean “spew”) nothing but negativity and hatred towards the Church in your comments here. I therefore doubt your credibility, your Catholicism, and your goodwill. Straight up.
jon, you totally misunderstand Catholic commenters, who express their legitimate concerns about immorality in the Church, and concerns about bad clerical leaders. There are many very serious problems and dangers, in today’s Church. Our pope often does not seem to correct these problems– a matter of great and legitimate concern. Of course, our pope also has done many good things. Many Catholic commenters are worried parents or grandparents, with Catholic families, and big responsibilities. Many also are involved in their parishes, and parish schools, and are worried about dangers that they may see, that go uncorrected– and worsen as the years go by. There is often no clergy help, to fix serious problems. Responsible Catholic parishioners that make complaints, are very worried about very serious issues — issues that also directly affect them and their families. Their complaints are not “academic,” as in college-style theology debates. To foolishly plug your ears, loudly proclaim your “papal loyalty”– and refuse to listen intelligently, and read thoughtfully, the serious concerns of many good Catholic commenters— and then, to mindlessly insult them all, with no heart, no interest, and no manners — is not helpful.
“Reply to”: please. Let’s get real here. The “concerns” and “complaints” of yours and the other commentators of this blog do not reflect the legitimate concerns of the ordinary Catholic men, women, families, young people in the US and around the world. Nope. For example: do you really think that one of the legitimate “concerns” of ordinary Catholics in the US and around the world includes whether or not Pope Francis worships the Pachamama? News to “Reply to”: it is not. Observant Catholics like me know that that is the “particular concern” of those who hate Pope Francis. Ordinary Catholics know that the Pope of the Catholic Church only worships the True and One God Who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. You see “Reply to” the biggest problem in the Church is lack of faith and obedience to God Almighty. And that lack of faith and obedience is exacerbated by people who lack obedience to God’s own ministers and clergy such as those who comment here. They cause division in the Church and they demoralize ordinary Catholics by their rhetoric and scandalous words in blogs like this.
jon, they are trying to be faithful, I believe, but not knowing where to go to get the truth. They have not read the Bible or the Catechism or legitimate Church communications.
They trust the wrong people to tell them what to think.
We need to pray for them.
It is a journey. I remember being zealous without understanding earlier in my journey.
It seems to me Pope Francis is promoting Modernism, which is an anathema and soundly and constantly reproved by Pope Leo XIII and others. So, is Pope Francis changing the Magisterium? Perhaps we’ll soon see a new Catechism?
Actually the problem is that there are a lot of modernists who attend the Latin Mass and do not obey the Magisterium.
Modernism-the synthesis of all heresies- is very basically, that one does not have to conform to the Church’s rules, teachings, etc. It does not matter whether it is about the Bible, Tradition or decisions of the Magisterium.
We may be in an era called post-modernism. What i witness is people who inculcate in others a distrust of the Church.
In the beginning, modernism was a freeing from the Church’s Magisterial rulings. Now it manifests as acceptance of important and necessary teachings (such as the sinfulness of abortion and the Real Presence of the Eucharist or the sanctity of marriage) but without accepting the authority of the Magisterium, because in their view, the Magisterium does not really accept these necessary teachings or any of the others. .
It contains the arrogance and ignorance of the original modernism, the deception, too. But the falsehoods have changed.
You cannot trust anyone but the Church. If you are at variance with the Church, the fault is in you.
Even as I write that, I feel fear.
Because I understand the problems that have arisen lately and not-so-lately. But still…
You’re only safe place is in the Church.
I know a Catholic who is under spiritual assault by another. They are undermining his faith in the Church. What has been used so far: Vatican II, teachings of the Magisterium on marriage that do not conform with modern (Hollywood) thinking.
And the person under attack has never read the V2 documents, does not really know what it was (an ecumenical council like the Council of Ephesus or the Council of Trent) and is a romantic who feels that human love is the most important thing.
This person under attack went to Franciscan University so he is pretty solid in the Faith but there are always chinks in the armor that the devil can exploit.
Read the Bible every day. pray the Rosary every day.
Yes, pray the Rosary. St. Francis of Assisi knew this problem well. He could not trust the Church in his era– it was way too corrupt! He simply followed Christ. And that is what we should do, too. There are way too many “wolves in sheep’s clothing,” in today’s Church, who are not properly disciplined by the Church, preaching false, immoral, and dangerous
teachings! Treacherous! But Christ is with each of us, forever.
“Actually the problem is that there are a lot of modernists who attend the Latin Mass and do not obey the Magisterium.” The dumbest comment ever printed on this site
“bohemond” is mistaken again. Actually, “modernist’s” comment that there are a lot of modernists who attend the TLM may have some merit to it. One of the “plans” of modernists is “a spirit of complete emancipation, tending to weaken ecclesiastical authority…” Don’t you find that “spirit” and that attitude among those who go to the TLM? They do not like Vatican II, they do not like the Ordinary Form, they do not adhere to the teachings of the recent Magisterium, and so as a statement of their “modernist” sensibilities that disobey ecclesial authority of the popes and the bishops, they frequent the TLM. Actually, Pope Francis pinpointed another element of their deficiency: modern Pelagianism.
“Yawn”
Dismissive reactions like this only display your incivility.
jon, I think your term “recent Magisterium” is an error.
If you reject the Magisterium as teacher, you reject the Magisterium as teacher.
Sorry but my use of the phrase “recent Magisterium” is very correct. It is arguable that these folks have stopped listening to the Magisterium after the reign of Pius XII, hence my use of the word “recent.”
They do not believe in the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.
If they listened to the Magisterium up until Pius XII, they would listen to it after. Because that is a tenet of the Faith.
Ah the old Latin Mass debate is heating up again, back to the 1960s, it’s yesterday once more… It was Vatican II that changed the Mass. And Pope Paul’s VI “bull” on birth control was actually debated at Vatican II. As one comic said back in the day, “You no play-a the game you no make-a the rules,” about celibate men dictating what kind of birth control women can use — in pill form. But actually, these so called celibate priests are getting women pregnant and have secretly paid for their abortions for a very long time. All the secrecy and platitudes….. and the billions of dollars the church is having to pay the victims of clerical abuse…. the Latin Mass. I just have to smile at my own young self being shocked the first time I went to a guitar mass for a Newman Center as a kid. If people want the Latin Mass, just go for it. It’s no big deal. PS I agree that people should stop thinking those devoted to the Latin Mass are stupid fanatics, I think it is a lovely rite, and exposure to a foreign language so connected to the development of English and legal terminology has so many educational benefits. That’s the best part of Catholicism in my opinion. QED :-)
I was not at Vatican II but I do not believe that claim that Humanae Vitae (an encyclical) was debated at Vatican II, at least in the formal meetings. If you have a source for that please share it.
Read the history of Vatican II and of “Humanae Vitae!” In 1960, the controversial Birth Control Pill was introduced– quite a shock in society! And in 1963, Pope St. John XXIII established a commission to study the subject. Towards the end of Vatican II, Pope St. Paul VI enlarged the commission, to include nearly 60 people– laymen and clerics. The Council’s final document, “Gaudium et Spes,” then included a section on “Marriage.” And after the Council ended, the Pope issued the final teaching on the subject, with his encyclical, “Humanae Vitae,” of July 25, 1968. Another big shock! But faithful Catholics revered and accepted the Pope’s fine teaching on the subject.
I went back and read some of the section on Marriage in Gaudium et Spes. My first reaction is: all those who diminish Vatican II should read it. and then, Everyone should read it.
Thank you for the reminder.
The teachings of “Humanae Vitae” were certainly not new, nor unique to the Second Vatican Council. These teachings are ancient, taught for centuries by the Catholic Church. Pope Paul VI simply reaffirmed these ancient teachings.
Reply to sources: that committee was established to investigate whether or not The Pill was contraceptive or not. The Church was not about to change Her teachings about the intrinsic evil of contraception. That was already explained years earlier in CASTI CONNUBII.
I am not arguing about birth control or the Pontifical Commission.
The claim was made that a papal bull (Humanae Vitae?, released in 1968) was debated at Vatican II. The claim was made in a comment by Audrey Lockwood.
I was asking for a source that confirmed that.
In 1960, when the controversial Birth Control Pill came out, there were some interesting articles in popular women’s magazines, sold in grocery stores, warning women that the Birth Control Pill is immoral, and opens the door to promiscuity and tragically– infidelity. Marriages and families may be at great risk! In those days, even Protestants and some non-church-goers were skeptical, and viewed Birth Control as being questionable, morally, and against God’s Will. Many Protestanrs shared the same view of Birth Control as Catholics, believing it is immoral, and a sin.
When the controversial Birth Control Pill first came out in America in 1960, one of my grandmothers laughed at it and said, “What a terrible thing for American society! Why buy the cow when the milk is free? What will happen to the institution of Marriage and Family?” She and my grandfather both were immigrants, living in San Francisco.
When websites such as this one feature banner ads for a show titled “Stop the McElroy Elevation”, I think that looking backwards is something that a lot of trad Catholics seem to think is what they should be doing.
It has to do with how he engaged with someone who was abused by a priest, not the Latin Mass.
I’m confused… so this is a trad website? Where does it fall on the spectrum among, say, Novus Ordo Watch, Rorate Caeli, Church Militant, The Remnant, and Fr. Z? Is this website aptly grouped among those trad sites?
Some of the commenters seem to be patrons of those sites.
Looking backwards is a sin because it does not progress with the Church?
Is this a grave sin?
Is it something that needs to be confessed before receiving Communion.
for the full version of the “plane home interview, in a very accurate translation , go to Catholic World Report, July 30th edition. the ambiguity issue denied by jon truly seems to be present in the answer to Claire Giangrave, the reporter from Religion News Service. The Spanish news media i tracked clearly felt that “desarollar”, “to develop or evolve”, could be read as an ambiguous way of saying “to change”. He used a form of the word 4 times in the answer and stated “you cannot do theology with a No” in front of it”.
“drewlow” is mistaken. Why follow the Spanish version? The Pope’s interview was conducted in Italian. Strike one for you. Strike two is that when Pope Francis said “you cannot do theology with a ‘no’ in front of it” he makes sense. The Pope there is articulating the plain fact that the work of theologians is to explore, to research, to open doors. It’s the Magisterium’s work to approve or disapprove their findings according to what has gone before. Strike three for “drewlow” is that the Pope is not ambiguous in the interview. He was clear that any development in the understanding of dogma or morality must proceed in the same direction (understand what he’s saying there people). He quoted St. Vincent of Lérins. He was clear on the task of theologians versus the ministry of the Magisterium. No ambiguity there. Fourth strike is that “drewlow” seems to treat this interview as if the Pope is obligated to be unequivocally clear. People, this an interview on a plane en route to Rome after his trip to Canada. This was not an exercise of his ordinary magisterium. We Catholics recognize when popes speak definitively and when they don’t. Imagine, accusing Pope Francis of being ambiguous when all he probably wanted to do was to take a break in this flight and stretch his legs a bit at the back of the plane and answer some questions.
Right. He is more advanced than you are.
Theologians study God. They can be right. They can be wrong.
Sometimes they get so wrong that the Church has to ban their work.
That is the job of the Church.
I do not read many theologians (not even Ratzinger) because you cannot have confidence in their writings.
To develop or evolve does not mean to go backwards. There are always a new challenge and new things to learn.
Even something that seems as simple as “Thou shalt not steal” has to evolve with all the new ways that people can defraud others.
“Thou shalt not kill” and “Thou shalt not commit adultery” has been developed or evolved by the Lord Himself in Matthew 5:21-28.
You might be anxious that the Pope would intend to say that something sinful is not sinful. That is not what he means.
The teaching on capital punishment is evolving to take more seriously with less exception “Thou shalt not kill.” Many do not like that.
Many do not like any change. I don’t either but we need to be sober and vigilant and not let the enemy devour us.
“looking backwards” also applies to wishing to bring back the lost “spirit of Vatican II’, the magic aura not caught in words that was alleged to have hovered over the euphoria.But to wish we were still there is also a looking backwards .In a certain sense, is the Holy Father also an “indietrista” ?
Did the person who googled “Cardinal Hollerich-interviews on changing the Catechism” read all the things that came up. Here is how it works-they are all articles on different websites about the same thing.
I think the people who complain about ambiguity have a point.
People project themselves-their hopes and their fears onto him.
The Catholic Church is infallible in Faith and Morals. Gay sex will not become not a sin. (Just like heterosexual sex outside of a sacramental marriage will not become not a sin.) The Sacrament of Matrimony will not become available to same sex couples.
Cardinal Hollerich is vague and it causes consternation. He is not talking about changing Church teaching on Faith and Morals.
Cdl. Hollerich has actually repeatedly said that the Catechism is “out of date” and “wrong” on sexuality and morals– and should be “updated” to include Gay Sex and Gay “Marriage.” Of course– it does not seem possible, that he could get his ideas implemented, of changing the Catechism. A large number of people and groups, worldwide, have been complaining about the Synod, and Hollerich. Several large groups of youth and young families– including a devout Catholic youth group in Ireland– have made big complaints to the Vatican about the recent Synod, and Hollerich, saying that it does not represent them at all, as devout Catholics, and that the Synod should not include dissidents and non-Catholics.
This particular group of devout Catholic young people from Ireland, that has made complaints regarding the recent Synod, and has written letters to the Vatican, etc. — has more than 500 young people! Hope that more and more uoung Catholics in Ireland join them. Regardless of the Synod’s outcomes– they can do a great deal for the True Faith there, in Ireland, with their religious devotion. Maybe they also can help end abortion and Gay “Marriage” in Ireland, and uphold Catholic Marriage and Family in their country.
Our Lord Jesus greatly revered His Jewish Faith, holy parents and grandparents, and His great ancestors, and all of the great writings in the Jewish Torah, the Old Testament. And it is very important today, to teach the holy Catholic Faith, and all of the history and knowledge of our great Western culture, to the young. What great knowledge and treasures of our holy Faith, and revered Tradition, from our 2,000+ years old Church, and all its treasure-trove of holy Saints, martyrs, and heroes– would Pope Francis like to preach about, today?
St. Matthew 5:22
“But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother, shall be in danger of the judgment. And whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council. And whosoever shall say, Thou Fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.”